|
/
Zope
/
Apsis
/
Pound Mailing List
/
Archive
/
2012
/
2012-07
/
multiple servers, one ip
[
Per subdomain ssl certs in one https listener - ... ]
[
MAXBUF again - configurable? / Pedro Pessoa ... ]
multiple servers, one ip
Michael Miller <michael(at)steelcitypenguins.com> |
2012-07-22 18:21:01 |
[ FULL ]
|
Hi all!
Was pointed toward pound by a friend when I asked him about his thoughts
on using apache to redirect traffic based on host header. I want to have
several web servers as virtual machines but only have one external IP.
Currently I simply use one server with virtual host headers and apache.
For various reasons I want to split the traffic for 2 sites to their own
dedicated virtual servers. I was thinking of using apache on a separate
virtual server with mod proxy to achieve this.
So I found out about pound and said this seems like a good idea, setup a
small virtual server with only pound installed to handle all the web
requests and I can use different ports for ssh to remote control each
machine since that isnt as odious as having web users specify a port.
One line in the pound info concerned me though.....
"Some people asked about the possibility of redirecting requests to
back-ends as per some virtual hosts definition. While I believe this is
not /Pound/'s job, it can be done."
Is pound not the best solution for this? Is there something better?
Thanks to anyone who would like to answer my question =)
Michael
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [Pound Mailing List] multiple servers, one ip
Dave Steinberg <dave(at)redterror.net> |
2012-07-22 19:45:37 |
[ FULL ]
|
> "Some people asked about the possibility of redirecting requests to[...]
That is more of an aside than anything else. I suspect that the
majority of pound users are doing vhosting based on the Host header as
the docs suggest.
Bottom line - it works fine, don't let that comment hold you back.
Regards,[...]
|
|
|
Re: [Pound Mailing List] multiple servers, one ip
Michael Miller <michael(at)steelcitypenguins.com> |
2012-07-23 05:56:26 |
[ FULL ]
|
Awesome that is great....
However I am having trouble getting the daemon to start, just says
"failed" every time I try to start it.
Is this config ok?? Test server one that pound is installed on is
192.168.1.71 and the alternate server is 192.168.1.72.....
User "michael"
Group "michael"
LogFacility daemon
LogLevel 4
Alive 30
Client 10
TimeOut 10
Grace 10
ListenHTTP
Address 192.168.1.71
Port 8080
Service
HeadRequire "(Host: hostname.dyndns.org)"
BackEnd
Address 192.168.1.72
Port 8080
End
End
End
On 7/22/2012 1:45 PM, Dave Steinberg wrote:[...][...]
|
|
|
Re: [Pound Mailing List] multiple servers, one ip
Michael Miller <michael(at)steelcitypenguins.com> |
2012-07-23 08:11:20 |
[ FULL ]
|
Sorry correction I do have the .s and *s[...]
>>> "Some people asked about the possibility of redirecting requests
to
>>> back-ends as per some virtual hosts definition. While I believe
this is
>>> not /Pound/'s job, it can be done."
>>>
>>> Is pound not the best solution for this? Is there something
better?[...][...]
|
|
|
Re: [Pound Mailing List] multiple servers, one ip
Rob Hicks <rob(at)hixfamily.org> |
2012-07-23 14:45:35 |
[ FULL ]
|
Michael,
Run pound with -v to give you output to the console. You can also check
your configuration by using -c. For testing, feed the configuration file
manually, rather than using a start script. So check the file like this:
pound -v -c -f /etc/pound.cfg (if that is where your configuration file is
at).
If it doesn't start, it should explain why.
If your configuration passes, start pound using:
pound -v -f /etc/pound.cfg.
As far as your configuration file, I would simplify it until you get it
started and configured. Remove the LogFacility unless you have checked your
syslog.h file and know for sure you're identifying it correctly. Make sure
the user/group exists. Basically remove everything you don't need to
specify because its a default and then start adding them back and testing
as you do.
Rob
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Michael Miller <
michael(at)steelcitypenguins.com> wrote:
[...][...]
>>>> back-ends as per some virtual hosts definition. While I
believe this is
>>>> not /Pound/'s job, it can be done."
>>>>
>>>> Is pound not the best solution for this? Is there something
better?
>>>>
>>>
>>> That is more of an aside than anything else. I suspect that the
>>> majority of pound users are doing vhosting based on the Host
header as the
>>> docs suggest.
>>>
>>> Bottom line - it works fine, don't let that comment hold you back.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>[...][...]
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [Pound Mailing List] multiple servers, one ip
Michael Miller <michael(at)steelcitypenguins.com> |
2012-07-23 19:15:36 |
[ FULL ]
|
Thanks much! That seems to have done the trick.....simple fix and now it
seems to work on this test server. Just about all set to build the new
vmware server and save lots of electricity while gaining more utility =)
On 7/23/2012 8:45 AM, Rob Hicks wrote:[...]
|
|
|
|
|
|