[Lispweb] Mod_lisp 2.0 released

Marc Battyani marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com
Tue Jun 19 15:27:17 CDT 2001


John Foderaro <jkf at franz.com> writes

>  Your list of advantages focused on the advantages of using mod_lisp
> over having two independent web servers: Apache for static content
> and a Lisp web server for dynamic content.
>
>  Let's assume that we've decided to go with a shim model with some
> standard web server out front and a Lisp application behind the scenes.
> I'd like to see a list of concrete advantages of mod_lisp over mod_proxy.
>
>  I'll give you some concete advantages of mod_proxy over mod_lisp:
>
> 1. Every major web server can do proxying.  mod_lisp on the other hand is
>    a. an Apache module.  Some people run other web servers now or may
>       run other web servers in the future.
>    b. not built into the Apache distribution.  It makes sysadmins nervous
>       if they have to load strange code into their web server.
>    b. works in a particular version of Apache.  sysadmins worry about
>       what happens when they upgrade their Apache.  Will it be their
>       job to deal with problems with mod_lisp and this version?
>
>    Thus asking your sysadmin to proxy a portion of your company's
url-space
>    over to your little app server is easy to get approved.  Asking your
sysadmin
>    to load a certain foreign module into the companies web server is going
>    to require a lot of meetings.

The F.U.D. argument is already enough used against Lisp, I'm not sure I buy
this. The few sysadmin/webmasters I've seen have been very happy when I told
them I wanted to use Apache + mod_lisp. Much more happy than when I tried to
sell them CL-HTTP in Fact. They are used to put open source modules and for
them one more module is not a problem. But YMMV.

> 2. Having the app server talk HTTP means
>    1. it can run standalone as well, perhaps to folks on your internal
>       network.  Outsiders would have to go through mod_proxy but they
>       would have an indentical experience to people internally.
>    2. when you're debugging you can use a web browser.
>       You don't have Apache in the loop

I've never said that mod_lisp should be used in place of an HTTP front-end.
For me mod_lisp is the best way to use Lisp behind Apache. This does not
mean that mod_lisp is the best way to make a server.

>    Security issues can be dealt with by having the app server look at
>    the source address of the request.  It's a trival matter to
>    simply refuse to respond to requests outside of a range of IP
addresses.

mod_lisp already provides the IP address and port of the caller to the Lisp
process.

The difference between mod_lisp and mod_proxy (or jserv or fastcgi or etc.)
is that mod_lisp wants to be more than just a proxy. I've already announced
that I wanted to add load balancing features and Daniel Barlow suggested to
add a cache.

Marc




More information about the lispweb mailing list