David
Fri May 02 23:03:39 CDT 2008
On May 2, 6:50=A0am, Niles Ferrier <j...@surofsky.net> wrote:
> On May 1, 3:30 am, David Wang <w3.4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 30, 6:29 am, Niles Ferrier <j...@surofsky.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 29, 11:09 pm, David Wang <w3.4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 29, 1:44 pm, Niles Ferrier <j...@surofsky.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > Hello.
>
> > > > > I have an IIS server running on Windows 2003. I also have an apach=
e
> > > > > server running on a linux box. (192.168.1.250) I only have 1 exter=
nal
> > > > > ip address and currently forward port 80 requests from my outside =
ip
> > > > > address to port 80 on the windows box (192.168.1.11) through a cis=
co
> > > > > pix box.
>
> > > > > I have an application that runs only on linux on apache server. I =
want
> > > > > to have IIS take the port 80 request for the app and forward it to=
> > > > > port 80 on the linux server.
>
> > > > > I know I can just use port 801 and forward it to port 80 on the li=
nux
> > > > > server, but i would prefer to NOT do it that way.
>
> > > > > Any suggestions?
>
> > > > > Thanks
>
> > > > You need to own one reverse proxy to do the sort of sharing that you=
> > > > want. The reverse proxy can be running in several configurations:
> > > > 1. Some Cisco routers can provide reverse proxy functionality. Look
> > > > for port and Host forwarding in the router
> > > > 2. Dedicated reverse proxy servers like ISA Server or Squid
> > > > 3. mod_proxy module on Apache
> > > > 4. several commercial modules on IIS
>
> > > > I would choose things in the order that I present them. Having a
> > > > webserver redirect traffic like a reverse proxy is *not* how you wan=
t
> > > > to implement what you want.
>
> > > > //David
http://w3-4u.blogspot.comhttp://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
> > > > //
>
> > > Perhaps a port redirection is really what I want to do then.
>
> > > Thanks for the reply.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > That depends on the functionality of what you use to redirect.
>
> > Also, do you want to redirect based on the original hostname, Port, or
> > URL.
>
> > //David
http://w3-4u.blogspot.comhttp://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
> > //
>
> I would love to have the PIX Box do the redirection. for example. if a
> request comes in forwww.abc.comgo to 192.168.1.11 on port 80, if a
> req comes in forwww.xyz.comgo to 192.168.1.250 on port 80.
>
> i dont hink the 501 can do that..- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, you have to do one of the four choices I mentioned earlier, and
each has its pros and cons.
Basically, the more money you pay, the better functionality,
reliability, and performance you get.
To me, the moment you try to use multiple servers to expose a
[consolidated] view of services to the Internet, you need the
networking devices to make it happen. Anything else is simply going to
sacrifice performance/reliability/scalability, and I hardly think that
one exposes functionality to the Internet with the intent of having
the functionality used by less users to compensate for the performance/
reliability/scalability sacrifice.
Thus, when you want to move up and provide a more professional
experience, you have to spend money. The question is whether you buy
the right device with the right functionality and at what price.
//David
http://w3-4u.blogspot.com
http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
//