I have recently installed PHP, MySQL Server, and Apache web server. I played around with some PHP scripts locally on the PC to insert some entries to MySQL Database.
Noob question so please be patient with me:
How do I get my web service out to the internet, by self hosting? Say I already have a domain for example mydomain.com How do I make it so that when someone not within my network can access mydomain.com/something and can send some data so my server gets it and do anything with that data?
Webhosting
You have to have some form of webhosting. You pay for hosting and you can upload your PHP files to their servers. They will usually also have database servers you can use.
Your domain name has to point to those servers via DNS so the internet can reach your application. I'd suggest you search the internet for popular hosts that provide the tools your need for this.
Self hosting
Another possibility is to open your network up to the world, but this is not recommended unless you have network administration experience due the security trouble that comes with it.
In short: forward a port through your router to the machine running your application. The website portforward.com has instructions on how to do this but keep in mind that misconfiguration could lead to vulnerabilities in your network.
In order to make you site public
1. you need host
2. you need domain
there are bunch of hosting sites you should get one first.
This link explains very well about self hosting
https://www.boutell.com/newfaq/creating/hostmyown.html
Wondering if we can share session data between two servers (running different code) behind an Nginx reverse proxy.
To be precise, we have a legacy app in PHP running on an apache server. We are updating some functionality and hosting only that functionality on a separate server (nginx). Both apps update the same DB.
nginX uses load balancing/ reverse proxy URL rewritting techniques to decide which server to send the client to based on the URL path they use.
So, a person can add items to his virtual basket (held in session) on
the new server application.
He then decides to edit his personal information which is on the other server (Legacy).
Nginx uses it's reverse proxy/load balancing magic to decide which server to send the person to based on where an app is available.
The question is, how can a session created on one app server be available to another app server aswell? is it possible to setup the reverse proxy to store all session data and how. Please point me to the right direction of you can help with google links aswell.
your question has several possible answers. It all depends on the way the application is designed.
A possible scenario would be to keep session information on a database shared among different web heads. In this way the client, once authenticated will retrieve its "session status" regardless which server he is accessing in the final servers cluster backend.
Again, this depends very much on the way the application is/has been designed.
I think there is very little magic you can do on an old legacy application just by configuring the reverse proxy engine.
In the end, sessions are handled by the application server and not the proxy frontend.
I worked over the last weeks with wso2 products using some of the tutorials which were posted on the wso2 site.
Unfortunately I only found tutorials, where all the products run on the same machine.
What do I have to do, if I want to run the products on different machines. I want a configuration where:
- ESB runs on machine 1
- AS and GREG run onmachine 2
- Proxy-services in the ESB or a web servcie in AS are invoked from machine 3
I run these examples on some macs, I think the main problem are the ports which are used. Can somebody help me with the configuration?
Can you elaborate your configurarion problem?
With this configuration you have to be sure that from one server you can ping the another servers and that in each server you have the ports 9443 and 9763 (by default) open to the network. this is the only requirement you need.
What you are trying is nothing new. In a typical production deployment each of the servers run in their own physical/virtual machines.
when you are calling a service, you calling an endpoint uniquely identified by IP address:port/contextPath
If the setup is in the same local machine the IP address would be 'localhost'.
First you have to learn the tcp/ip basics, the question is not related to wso2 servers IMHO.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
Currently moving to Amazon EC2 from another VPS provider. We have your typical web server / database server needs. Web servers in front of our database servers. Database servers are not directly accessible from the Internet.
I am wondering if there is any reason to put these servers into an AWS Virtual Private Cloud (VPC) instead of just creating the instances and using security groups to firewall them off.
We are not doing anything fancy just a typical web app.
Any reason to use a VPC or not using a VPC?
Thanks.
NOTE: New accounts in AWS launch with a "default VPC" enabled immediately, and make "EC2-Classic" unavailable. As such, this question and answer makes less sense now than they did in August 2012. I'm leaving the answer as-is because it helps frame differences between "EC2-Classic" and the VPC product line. Please see Amazon's FAQ for more details.
Yes. If you're security conscious, a heavy CloudFormation user, or want complete control over autoscaling (as opposed to Beanstalk, which abstracts certain facets of it but still gives you complete access to the scaling parameters), use a VPC. This blog post does a great job summarizing both the pros and cons. Some highlights from the blog post (written by kiip.me):
What’s Wrong with EC2?
All nodes are internet addressable. This doesn’t make much sense for nodes which have no reason to exist on the global internet. For example: a database node should not have any public internet hostname/IP.
All nodes are on a shared network, and are addressable to each other. That means an EC2 node launched by a user “Bob” can access any of EC2 nodes launched by a user “Fred.” Note that by default, the security groups disallow this, but its quite easy to undo this protection, especially when using custom security groups.
No public vs private interface. Even if you wanted to disable all traffic on the public hostname, you can’t. At the network interface level each EC2 instance only has one network interface. Public hostnames and Elastic IPs are routed onto the “private” network.
What's Great About the VPC
First and foremost, VPC provides an incredible amount of security compared to EC2. Nodes launched within a VPC aren’t addressable via the global internet, by EC2, or by any other VPC. This doesn’t mean you can forget about security, but it provides a much saner starting point versus EC2. Additionally, it makes firewall rules much easier, since private nodes can simply say “allow any traffic from our private network.” Our time from launching a node to having a fully running web server has gone from 20 minutes down to around 5 minutes, solely due to the time saved in avoiding propagating firewall changes around.
DHCP option sets let you specify the domain name, DNS servers, NTP servers, etc. that new nodes will use when they’re launched within the VPC. This makes implementing custom DNS much easier. In EC2 you have to spin up a new node, modify DNS configuration, then restart networking services in order to gain the same effect. We run our own DNS server at Kiip for internal node resolution, and DHCP option sets make that painless (it just makes much more sense to type east-web-001 into your browser instead of 10.101.84.22).
And finally, VPC simply provides a much more realistic server environment. While VPC is a unique product to AWS and appears to “lock you in” to AWS, the model that VPC takes is more akin to if you decided to start running your own dedicated hardware. Having this knowledge beforehand and building up the real world experience surrounding it will be invaluable in case you need to move to your own hardware.
The post also lists some difficulties with the VPC, all of which more or less relate to routing: Getting an internet gateway or NAT instance out of the VPC, communicating between VPCs, setting up a VPN to your datacenter. These can be quite frustrating at times, and the learning curve isn't trivial. All the same, the security advantages alone are probably worth the move, and Amazon support (if you're willing to pay for it) is extremely helpful when it comes to VPC configuration.
Currently VPC has some useful advantages over EC2, such as:
multiple NICs per instance
multiple IP's per NIC
'deny'-rules in security-groups
DHCP options
predictable internal IP ranges
moving NICs and internal IPs between instances
VPN
Presumably Amazon will upgrade EC2 with some of those features as well, but currently they're VPC-only.
VPCs are useful if your app needs to access servers outside of EC2, e.g. if you have a common service that's hosted in your own physical data center and not accessible via the internet. If you're going to put all of your web and DB servers on EC2, there's no reason to use VPC.
Right now VPC is the only way to have internal load balancers
If you choose RDS to provide your database services, you can configure DB Security Groups to allow database connections from a given EC2 Security Groups, then even if you have dynamic IP addresses in your EC2 cluster, the RDS will automatically create the firewall rules to allow connections only from your instances, reducing the benefit of a VPS in this case.
VPS in the other hand is great when your EC2 instances have to access your local network, then you can establish a VPN connection between your VPS and your local network, controlling the IP range, sub networks, routes and outgoing firewall rules, which I think is not what you are looking for.
I would also highly recommend trying the Elastic Beanstalk, which will provide a console that makes easy to setup your EC2 cluster for PHP, Java and .Net applications, enabling Auto Scaling, Elastic Load Balancer and Automatic Application Versioning, allowing easy rollback from bad deployments.
You have raised a good concern here.
I would like to focus on the viability in terms of cost...
What about the cost factor?
I think You will be paying for that server per hour. Even if you pick $20-$50 dollars a month instance it will be something you will pay the rest of your server life. The VPN server is something you can easily set on old hardware very cheap and even free for open source solution.
Adding VPN to existing AWS servers park make sense, setting a solo VPN server on AWS doesn't. I don't think it is the best cost-effective option but that just my opinion.
Thanks,
Alisa
Situation
I have a windows service which I would like to make highly available.
I have two unclustered servers (Windows server 2003 standard edition).
The question is:
What options do I have to make my service highly available in an automated way?
I can think of the asymmetric master-slave option which consists of keeping the service running on both machines with a communication heartbeat between them so one acts as the master and the slave takes over automatically whenever the master does not respond.
Do you know any other ways to implement this?
note: Please don't point me to this answer, I do NOT/won't/can't have clusters.
If you're windows service is hosting a web/wcf service, you can configure your client to have a primary service url and a secondary service url. Then you can modify the client connection logic to use the secondary service when connection to the primary service fails.
You can do this transparently by adding a router service which will do the logic above. Basically proxying the operations for whichever service it is connected to. But this adds another point of failure, the router service.
The simplest i cant think of is to make sure to set the service recovery options on your windows service/s. Something like this http://code.google.com/p/daemoniq/wiki/WindowsServiceRecoveryOptions
HTH
I suggest checking MS Patterns and Practices web site, there you could find advice on this topic (for example http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998414.aspx)