Thanks very much, Oleksiy.
Kim
On 07/29/09 06:05, Oleksiy Stashok wrote:
> It's correct, common case network-listener<->protocol is 1:1
>
> On Jul 28, 2009, at 22:46 , Justin Lee wrote:
>
>> I have 0 data to back this up, but I'd say the common case would be a
>> 1:1 match between network-listener and protocol. Having said that,
>> large systems might reuse elements quite a bit. Port unification
>> might blur those lines as well. I'd suggest getting feedback from
>> jeanfrancois, alexey, dhiru, and rajiv (I think). They were the
>> progenitors of the grizzly config spec. I just picked it up and
>> finished it up so some of those decisions pre-date my involvement so I
>> don't have all the rationalizations behind some of them.
>>
>> Anissa Lam wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Kim for starting this thread. I also have a question, please
>>> see comment.
>>>
>>> Kim Haase wrote:
>>>> On 07/28/09 15:05, Justin Lee wrote:
>>>>> Kim Haase wrote:
>>>>>> Also, is it correct that a virtual server is normally associated
>>>>>> with one or more network listeners, but that you can create a
>>>>>> virtual server that isn't associated with any network listener,
>>>>>> then create the network listener, then edit the virtual server to
>>>>>> specify that network listener?
>>>>> That is correct. Though it'd save you a step to create the
>>>>> network-listener first, I'd think.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, that may be worth mentioning. I notice the Admin Guide
>>>> doesn't cover this area just yet -- probably this kind of
>>>> information is worth including there, too.
>>>>
>>>> So with the Admin Console anyway, you'd want to create a protocol,
>>>> create a network listener, then create a virtual server that uses
>>>> the network listener.
>>> Actually I am thinking to change the way Admin Console works so that
>>> it behaves like the CLI with respect to creating a network
>>> listener. My question: what is the common use case ? How often
>>> does 2 or more network listener share/refer to the same protocol
>>> ? If the common case is 1-1 relationship, then GUI shouldn't
>>> require user to create a protocol first and then go create the
>>> network listener. GUI should just create the protocol for this
>>> network listener at the same time, just like the CLI does. I
>>> think Justin mentioned about this before. Justin, can you confirm ?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Anissa
>>>>
>>>> Kim
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks very much,
>>>>>> Kim Haase
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>