[Asterisk-Users] Survey: what's the best HTTPd/TFTPd/FTPd to serve up configuration files to sets

[Tzafrir Cohen]

Debian leaves the burden of choice to the user. It carries 3 tftpd-s, at
least 3 dhcpd-s and at least 16 httpd-s

Another note regarding memory usage:
Apache2 offers better memory usage with the thread pool model (rather
than the process pool of apache1). But just remember that mod_php4 still
doesn't run well with threaded apache.

My recomendations below...

On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 08:00:55PM -0500, Jim Van Meggelen wrote:
> I would like to start a discussion centred around the various ways one
> might serve up configuration files from an Asterisk server (I know, it's
> better to use a secondary server for all this, but let's talk about a
> smaller system).

If memory is an issue and all you want is a simple http file server
there are plenty to choose from. Not all of them support cgi and not all
of them support directory listing.

If you need CGI, thttpd may be a smart choice.

> 
> The types of things being served would include:
> - Logo image for sets that support that

That's simple file serving

> - XML directory files

What do you need this for? Does apache support this?

> - XML or raw text configuration files

Simple file serving, again.

> - what-all-else
> 
> Seems to me that Apache is simply way too overpowered for all this, and
> thus would needlessly place load on the server.

Apache has many useful facilities. It is also well-supported and
well-understood. It may save you time using apache.

> 
> I have heard that khttpd is pretty lightweight, but its use seems to
> have been deprecated, and it does not appear to be actively maintained.
> Is TuX the way to go?

Frankly I don't think an httpd should live in the kernel. This is
something better done in userspace. It is not significantly better than
optimized user-space httpd-s, and it is probably much less configurable.

Anyway, just to name a few alternatives:

$ apt-cache search -n httpd
aolserver - AOL Web Server 3 (Program)
aolserver4 - AOL Web Server 4 (Program)
apache - versatile, high-performance HTTP server
apache-perl - versatile, high-performance HTTP server with Perl support
apache-ssl - versatile, high-performance HTTP server with SSL support
apache2-mpm-perchild - experimental high speed perchild threaded model for Apache2
apache2-mpm-prefork - traditional model for Apache2
apache2-mpm-worker - high speed threaded model for Apache2
boa - Lightweight and High Performance WebServer
bozohttpd - Bozotic HTTP server
caudium - An extensible WWW server written in Pike
dhttpd - minimal secure webserver without cgi-bin support
fnord - yet another small httpd
mathopd - Very small, yet very fast HTTP server
micro-httpd - really small HTTP server
mzscheme - PLT Scheme Interpreter
roxen3 - The Roxen Challenger Webserver
thttpd - tiny/turbo/throttling HTTP server
thttpd-util - Support utilities for thttpd
thy - A tiny and fast http daemon

If you build a busybox-based system, then you can use its built-in
thttpd.

> 
> As for tftpd 

$ apt-cache search -n tftpd
atftpd - advanced TFTP server
tftpd - Internet trivial file transfer protocol server.
tftpd-hpa - HPA's tftp server

tftpd is version 0.17 . tftpd-hppa (H. Peter Anvin?) is a a version with 
some later additions. Current version is 0.40 . You'll probably need it 
if you want to use PXE booting. It also has some more options. I figure
your distro will only have one of those.

atftpd has even more features.

Sadly, non of them includes a CGI-like ability. I rememeber omeone from
this list posted a Java implementation of a tftpd with the ability to
serve dynamic content. 

When we played with tftpd our poor-man's replacement for such an ability
was to monitor the logs for access errors and produce the file, in hope
that the system will retry.

> and ftpd, I'm just not sure. Leightweight is the key, here.

vsftpd would probalby be a wise choice here, but frankly, I figure no
ftpd will take too many reources so configurabuility , security etc.
should be your main cncerns.

Proftpd is probably not a bad choice either.

> 
> Thoughts, opinions, experiences?

For a dnsd and dhcpd: dnsmasq . It is actually easy and simple to
configure if you use /etc/hosts and /etc/ethers .

-- 
Tzafrir Cohen         | New signature for new address and  |  VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il | new homepage                       | a Mutt's  
tzafrir at cohens.org.il |                                    |  best
ICQ# 16849755         | Space reserved for other protocols | friend