× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Nathan -

I configured an additional IP address on our current NIC using CFGTCP option
1 and attempted to start a Apache test instance on that address, port 80.
Received the following message every 5 seconds for 5 minutes (as the
documentation states will happen) and the test instance shut itself down:

 Message ID . . . . . . :   HTP803D       Severity . . . . . . . :   10
 Message type . . . . . :   Diagnostic
 Date sent  . . . . . . :   01/22/03      Time sent  . . . . . . :
14:26:56

 Message . . . . :   HTTP Server waiting for address 10.10.18.54 port 80 to
   become available.
 Cause . . . . . :   The HTTP server is attempting to bind to address
   10.10.18.54 on port 80, but the TCP interface or port is currently not
   available. The server is retrying the socket bind operation. The error
   number is 3420.  Error numbers and their meanings are:
     - 3420: Port already in use

Did I miss something?

Thanks,

Steve

"Nathan M. Andelin"
<nandelin=uLFwQiodB6j7ZPEc29C2Qq6+1OQI6iwo@public.gmane.org> wrote in
message 011601c2be79$bb732140$fbfea8c0@realdata">news:011601c2be79$bb732140$fbfea8c0@realdata...
> > From: "Steve McKay"
<steve.mckay=eHnG4ojNSJOrG/iDocfnWg@public.gmane.org>
> > Can we run 4 separate instances (each with their own IP
> > address) on the same NIC (Ethernet) and still use port 80
> > for each IP address?
>
> Yes.  OS/400 supports multiple IP addresses on a single NIC.  Each
instance
> of the HTTP Server can be configured to receive requests on the same port
> (80) of the unique individual IP addresses.
>
> > Or will the first instance started take control of port 80 to the
> > exclusion of the other instances?
>
> No.
>
> > If we do separate the apps to different instances, would we see any
> > performance benefit?
>
> No.  Performance may decline just a tad.  You'd need to come up with a way
> to properly route requests to the correct IP address.  What you're
proposing
> is probably slightly less scalable due to some extra load associated with
> routing requests across multiple addresses, and the extra load of running
> multiple HTTP server instances.
>
> > We want to separate the instances so we can shut down individual apps
> > without taking all of them down.
>
> Are these CGI apps?
>
> Nathan M. Andelin
> www.relational-data.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries (WEB400) mailing list
> To post a message email: WEB400=Zwy7GipZuJhWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/web400
> or email: WEB400-request=Zwy7GipZuJhWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.
>
>




As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.