On 27/06/18 17:50, Rainer Jung wrote: > Since encryption would be most of the most useful features and IMHO we > won't get there, I suggest we discuss deprecation and EOL dates for AJP > - meaning mod_jk and AJP connectors.
+1 > There's no need to rush, but there could be a clear statement, that no > feature improvements will be done and users should plan for moving to > mod_proxy_http (or other http/https) clients. > > I think it would be better to invest time in improving mod_proxy where > it still might lack. For instance adding custom headers to transport > communication info from the proxy to the backend like AJP does and which > could be noticed by our Tomcat http connectors and/or support for the > PROXY protocol. +1 > So what do people think about: > > 1) adding a statement to the mod_jk docs, that we don't plan any feature > enhancements and suggest users to migrate to mod_proxy_http and the TC > HTTP connectors (but what about IIS? I think there are reverse proxy > modules there as well?) I believe there is, but we should investigate it a little first to see what the feature set is. I have a full set of current Windows OSes plus IIS VMs. I'm happy to look into this aspect. > 2) Adding a similar statement to the connector docs for AJP to TC 7-9. +1, with the above caveat. > 3) Deprecating AJP in TC 9 and removing in TC 10 That was sooner than I was expecting. I guess it comes down to what the timescale is for Tomcat 10 and that depends on Jakarta EE. I think I'd like to wait until we have a clearer picture of the Jakarta EE roadmap before deciding. If Tomcat 10 was far enough in the future (and assuming IIS has a reasonable set of features) then I'd be OK with that. How far is "far enough" and what "reasonable" means I'm still thinking about ;) Cheers, Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
