[Lispweb] Mod_lisp 2.0 released
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
> over to your little app server is easy to get approved. Asking your
> 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
mod_lisp already provides the IP address and port of the caller to the Lisp
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.
More information about the lispweb