On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:21:22 -0600, Oyesanya, Femi wrote
> Frank: 
> Am also having problems.  Can I see a copy of your config file ? 

Unfortunately I didn't keep the configs. I was using a patched up pound 1.8.3
which uses a different syntax. So it wouldn't have been that helpful anyway.
But the pound config was trivial. IIRC the only non standard thing was to add
the "Front-End-Https: on" header.

Cheers,
Frank

ListenHTTPS
    Address 1.2.3.4
    AddHeader "Front-End-Https: on"
    Port    443
    Cert    "/usr/share/ssl/certs/pound-new.pem"
    Ciphers
"ALL:!ADH:!EXPORT56:RC4+RSA:+HIGH:+MEDIUM:+LOW:+SSLv2:+EXP:+eNULL"
    xHTTP   4
    Service
        HeadRequire "Host: .*.mysite.com.*"
        BackEnd
            Address 10.11.12.13
            Port    80
        End
    End
End 

-----Original Message-----
From: Oyesanya, Femi [mailto:foyesanya(at)radiology.bsd.uchicago.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 11:21 AM
To: pound(at)apsis.ch
Subject: RE: [Pound Mailing List] Pound RPC over Http

Frank: 
Am also having problems.  Can I see a copy of your config file ? 

-----Original Message-----
From: Oyesanya, Femi [mailto:foyesanya(at)radiology.bsd.uchicago.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:18 AM
To: pound(at)apsis.ch
Subject: RE: [Pound Mailing List] Pound RPC over Http

Thanks 

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Schmirler [mailto:frank.schmirler(at)linogate.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:00 AM
To: pound(at)apsis.ch
Subject: Re: [Pound Mailing List] Pound RPC over Http

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 13:31:22 -0500, Oyesanya, Femi wrote
> Can pound be used to proxy RPC over HTTP?   Does anyone have
> documentation ? 

See
http://www.apsis.ch/pound/pound_list/archive/2006/2006-09/1157948206000
Unfortunately I didn't succeed yet. But the problem is not pound.
Windows
returns an RPC error. Maybe some authentication related problem (anyone
an idea?).

Cheers,
Frank

-- 
To unsubscribe send an email with subject 'unsubscribe' to
pound(at)apsis.ch.
Please contact roseg(at)apsis.ch for questions.
http://www.apsis.ch/pound/pound_list/archive/2006/2006-10/1161023482000/
1161068410000

-- 
To unsubscribe send an email with subject 'unsubscribe' to
pound(at)apsis.ch.
Please contact roseg(at)apsis.ch for questions.
http://www.apsis.ch/pound/pound_list/archive/2006/2006-10/1161023482000/
1161094667000

-- 
To unsubscribe send an email with subject 'unsubscribe' to
pound(at)apsis.ch.
Please contact roseg(at)apsis.ch for questions.
http://www.apsis.ch/pound/pound_list/archive/2006/2006-10/1161023482000/
1162322482000

Hi Dominic, 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sayers, Dominic [mailto:Dominic.Sayers(at)dkib.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 08 November 2006 11:22
> To: pound(at)apsis.ch
> Subject: [Pound Mailing List]
> 
> I have pound 2.1 running on a host that also runs VMware server. Pound
> is redirecting HTTP traffic to a number of virtual machines hosted on
> this server and also to a backend server running on another machine
> altogether.

I have a similar setup. The difference is that I have Pound installed
inside a VM instead of on the host itself and that I use NAT'ing instead
of bridging.

> Except it isn't doing this consistently. Aaargh, I hate intermittent
> problems!
> 
> Approximately 50% of the time there is no response from any of the
> backend servers. There is no record of any attempts to access these
> servers in the logs.
> 
> I can post my pound.cfg file etc, but I was just wondering if 
> there was
> any reason why this configuration couldn't work? I've turned off
> httpd.vmware so there isn't any fighting over port 80.

I can't see any reason why it shouldn't work. It must be a configuration
issue. Either in Pound or in VMware networking. Just bear in mind that
some Pound features will not work under certain configurations. For
instance, HAPort checks perform a TCP handshake to know if your back-end
is alive and the virtual VMware router for a NAT'ed VM, not being a real
router, will actually perform the full handshake before relaying it to
the back-end, which may or not be available.

> Thanks for any advice,
> 
> Dominic Sayers
> 
> P.s. If you're not familiar with the architecture of VMware Server, it
> creates a virtual switch that is bridged to the internal NIC of the
> host. The virtual machines are attached to the virtual 
> switch. Pound is
> listening on both the internal IP and the external IP addresses of the
> host.

Without having more details, it is difficult to tell what might be
wrong. Because you mention that some back-ends are not being contacted
and that your Pound server is listening on both internal and external
NICs, make sure that the internal NICs it is listening on are not the
ones of the back-ends.

Regards,

 Curro

This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient.
Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the
intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this
communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to this
message and then delete it from your system.

Hi All,

Been away from the list for a while, but we're now looking at upgrading 
to version 2.

I previously posted this:

 > Anyway, we currently use Pound in conjunction with this patch -
 > http://www.apsis.ch/pound/pound_list/archive/2005/2005-04/1113404051000
 >
 > You stated at the time you may look into integrating this into Pound -
 > any progress on this? It's unlikely we would be prepared to upgrade to
 > v2 unless it has this functionality (either built in or as a patch - and
 > I don't think we have the knowledge to patch it ourselves).
 >
 > If Pound 2 had built in support for failover back ends like this, we
 > would definitely be encouraged to progress testing and put into
 > production. I imagine, from past mailing list posts, others would be in
 > a similar situation.

Does version 2 (stable or beta) have this built in now as Robert has 
suggested in the past?

Regards,

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Taylor | Technical Architect
Corporate IT | Rentokil Initial Plc
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: andrew.taylor(at)rentokil-initial.com | Tel: +44 (0)1293 858076
-------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 17:02 +0000, Andrew Taylor wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Been away from the list for a while, but we're now looking at upgrading 
> to version 2.
> 
> I previously posted this:
> 
>  > Anyway, we currently use Pound in conjunction with this patch -
>  > http://www.apsis.ch/pound/pound_list/archive/2005/2005-04/1113404051000
>  >
>  > You stated at the time you may look into integrating this into Pound -
>  > any progress on this? It's unlikely we would be prepared to upgrade to
>  > v2 unless it has this functionality (either built in or as a patch - and
>  > I don't think we have the knowledge to patch it ourselves).
>  >
>  > If Pound 2 had built in support for failover back ends like this, we
>  > would definitely be encouraged to progress testing and put into
>  > production. I imagine, from past mailing list posts, others would be in
>  > a similar situation.
> 
> Does version 2 (stable or beta) have this built in now as Robert has 
> suggested in the past?

See the "emergency back-end" section in the man page.
-- 
Robert Segall
Apsis GmbH
Postfach, Uetikon am See, CH-8707
Tel: +41-44-920 4904

 > See the "emergency back-end" section in the man page.

Excellent, thanks. I note that's in an experimental version. Is there 
timescales for making these stable?

Many thanks,

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Taylor | Technical Architect
Corporate IT | Rentokil Initial Plc
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: andrew.taylor(at)rentokil-initial.com | Tel: +44 (0)1293 858076
-------------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 09:53 +0000, Andrew Taylor wrote:
>  > See the "emergency back-end" section in the man page.
> 
> Excellent, thanks. I note that's in an experimental version. Is there 
> timescales for making these stable?

It will definitely be part of 2.2, probably by the second half of next
month.
-- 
Robert Segall
Apsis GmbH
Postfach, Uetikon am See, CH-8707
Tel: +41-44-920 4904