<snip>

> In nginx I was able to include directories with the statements:
> 
> include /tmp/nginx/conf.d/*.conf; include
> /opt/etc/nginx/conf.d/*.conf;
> 
> Because pound works with only one file (AFAIK), my shell script needs
> to write the whole configuration file, which is far from elegant.
> Maybe I can use patch....

Or 'cat' or m4.  More below.

> My question is:
> 
> Does pound support more than 1 config-file for 1 listen session? If
> so...  how? If not... could this be incorporated?

I don't fully understand your question, but let me give you a rough 
outline of what I think would do what you're asking:

=== header.conf ====
User        "proxy"
Group       "proxy"
RootJail    "/var/pound"
Alive       15
TimeOut     120
LogLevel    5
Daemon      1
Control     "/tmp/pound.sock"
DynScale    0

ListenHTTP
         # localhost, for testing
         Address a.b.c.d
         Port 80
         RewriteLocation 0
         HeadRemove "X-Forwarded-Proto"
End
===
=== dom1.conf ====
### special handling for *.check*.geekisp.com
Service "foo1"
         HeadRequire "^Host:[ \t]*foo\.bar\.com$"
         Backend
                 Address backend_1
                 Port 80
         end
end
===
=== dom2.conf ===
Service "baz"
         HeadRequire "^Host:[ \t]*baz\.bar\.com$"
         Backend
                 Address backend_1
                 Port 81
         end
end
===

That's it.  Just 'cat' them all together and you get your pound.conf 
file.  This would send requests to foo.bar.com to "backend_1" on port 80 
and requests to "baz.bar.com" to backend_1 on port 81.

Regards,
-- 
Dave Steinberg
http://www.geekisp.com/
http://www.steinbergcomputing.com/

Jean-Pierre van Melis wrote:
> I’m using Pound as a proxy to be able to have more than 1 webserver behind my
NAT-router.
> The proxy sits between the connection all the time which is what a proxy is
supposed to do.
>  
> But I was wondering….
> It’s not really a proxy what I want. I just want an agent that will direct
the traffic to the proper webserver depending on the domain-name requested.
>  
> If pound would spoof the IP of the http-client, the backed would not respond
to pound, but to the http-client itself and from then on the servers would be
talking to each other.
>  
> I think a similar technique is used with SIP.
> Anyone knows how to do such a thing?

DSR, aka Direct Server Return, is not directly supported by pound.  You 
might be able to make it work if you did some magic, but I haven't heard 
of anybody doing it.

Regards,
-- 
Dave Steinberg
http://www.geekisp.com/
http://www.steinbergcomputing.com/

On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 12:21 -0400, Albert wrote:
> We encountered a problem earlier today where pound had too many open 
> files.  This had never happened before (in 3 years of running pound), 
> and happened right after we lost one of our web servers unexpectedly.  
> We have a HAPort setup for all of our backends (port other than 80), and 
> its checked every 15 sec.  At the time when pound started complaining 
> about too many open files, it hadn't removed the dead backend from 
> available list.
> 
> I believe I have tracked the problem to the fact that "shutdown" is not 
> being called prior to "close(socket)" on line 774 of http.c V2.4.2.   
> Looking at the rest of the code, every time a socket is about to be 
> closed, shutdown is called.  I don't know if this is the problem we 
> encountered with too many file handles being opened, but I was wondering 
> if shutdown() needs to be called before close().  Here's the snippet of 
> pound errors when this occurred:
> 
> Sep 10 09:45:36 p2 pound: (b4429ba0) backend 192.168.111.23:80 connect: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:37 p2 pound: (b3b05ba0) connect_nb: error after getsockopt: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:37 p2 pound: (b3b05ba0) backend 192.168.111.23:80 connect: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:37 p2 pound: (b487aba0) connect_nb: error after getsockopt: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:37 p2 pound: (b487aba0) backend 192.168.111.23:80 connect: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:38 p2 pound: HTTP accept: Too many open files
> Sep 10 09:45:38 p2 pound: (b52e3ba0) connect_nb: error after getsockopt: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:38 p2 pound: (b52e3ba0) backend 192.168.111.23:80 connect: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:34 p2 pound: (b4e51ba0) connect_nb: error after getsockopt: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:34 p2 pound: (b4e51ba0) backend 192.168.111.23:80 connect: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:34 p2 pound: (b697cba0) connect_nb: error after getsockopt: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:34 p2 pound: (b697cba0) backend 192.168.111.23:80 connect: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:35 p2 pound: (b509aba0) connect_nb: error after getsockopt: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:35 p2 pound: (b509aba0) backend 192.168.111.23:80 connect: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:35 p2 pound: (b70d9ba0) connect_nb: error after getsockopt: 
> Connection timed out
> Sep 10 09:45:35 p2 pound: (b70d9ba0) backend 192.168.111.23:80 connect: 
> Connection timed out

I am quite sure that adding a shutdown() would not hurt. However, having
too many open files is not likely to be related to this, but rather to
the total allowed number of open files.
-- 
Robert Segall
Apsis GmbH
Postfach, Uetikon am See, CH-8707
Tel: +41-44-920 4904

Hi!


Jean-Pierre van Melis írta:
> Someone wrote source-code patches to make pound transparent when they are
running on a Linux-system that's also the gateway of the clients.
> http://poundtp.freeweb.hu/
>   

I was the perpetrator. ;-)


> I'm still in the stage of investigating if I can make this run on my router.
I probably also need to get a kernel patch and a lot of other tinkering. If at
least the application supports it out of the box, it will make things simpler
when upgrading. I would love to have this as a standard feature in the firmware
of my router.
>   

I don't maintain the code. :-(
I wrote this patch for 2.0 b4.

It needs a special iptables module which does the hard work
(iptable_tproxy implemented by Balabit Ltd.).
The link to the module on page is not up to date.
New link: http://www.balabit.com/downloads/files/tproxy/

Some information about tproxy:
http://www.balabit.com/support/community/products/tproxy/

TProxy is not a cross-platform solution so I think there is no chance to
include in the normal codebase.

Best regatds,
ivan

On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 20:07 +0200, Jean-Pierre van Melis wrote:
> Someone wrote source-code patches to make pound transparent when they are
running on a Linux-system that's also the gateway of the clients.
> http://poundtp.freeweb.hu/
> 
> 
> I believe he wrote this patch in a way that it doesn't get in the way of
normal use.
> If this is true, could this code be included in the normal codebase?
> 
> I'm still in the stage of investigating if I can make this run on my router.
I probably also need to get a kernel patch and a lot of other tinkering. If at
least the application supports it out of the box, it will make things simpler
when upgrading. I would love to have this as a standard feature in the firmware
of my router.

If that is what you want, have a look at the OpenBSD pf - I think it
would do this sort of routing.

The original patch seems not to be very portable - as are all
kernel-based solutions.
-- 
Robert Segall
Apsis GmbH
Postfach, Uetikon am See, CH-8707
Tel: +41-44-920 4904

Anthony L wrote:
> On FreeBSD 6.4-PRERELEASE and latest Pound Version 2.4.3
> 
> LogFacility     pound

There is no such log facility as 'pound'.  Read the syslog man page - 
there is a small set of predefined facilities.  To do what you want, 
there's other ways that vary by the specifics of your syslog 
implementation.  You might ask on a FreeBSD users list and get more 
detailed help.

Regards,
-- 
Dave Steinberg
http://www.geekisp.com/
http://www.steinbergcomputing.com/

Yes, there is an "Emergency" directive you can use for "Service", which 
will kick in after your BackEnd A becomes unavailable.  As soon as 
BackEnd A is available, pound will switch to it, and stop sending 
requests to the Emergency (BackEnd B) server.

McCollough, Alan wrote:
> I'm looking to see if pound will do what I need.
>  
> I've got a webserver "A" that occasionally hangs up, and a backup "B"
> webserver with a snapshot of what is on "A".
>  
> What I need is something that will forward requests only to "A" under
> normal circumstances, but if "A" becomes unavailable, forward requests
> to "B" instead.
>  
> Does pound to this?
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe send an email with subject unsubscribe to pound(at)apsis.ch.
> Please contact roseg(at)apsis.ch for questions.
>
>
>