Hi there,

I have a very small number of users (100 or so) using my JSF web application
 deployed onto Websphere 6.0. I don't believe I need to use IBM HTTP server 
due to the small number of users, so I'd like to use the internal WAS web en
gine only.

My question is - what is the best way to enable SSL on port 443 for direct a
ccess to the WAS server (i.e. without going through IBM HTTP server)? These 
are the things I've done so far, please tell me if I've been correct:

1. I enabled global security
2. I updated the "DefaultSSLSettings" repertoire to point to my proper key f
ile which has the CA approved certificate for my hostname.
3. I noticed that the "WCInboundDefaultSecure" transport chain in the 'web c
ontainer transport chains' section pointed to port 9443. This should be 443,
 so I  went into that transport chain, went into it's "TCP Inbound Channel (
TCP_4)" and updated it's po
rt to 443.
4. Saved everything, and restarted the server.

Now, everything seems to work... I can access my application using https://localho
st/<app_name> without any problems and it displays the right certificate, so
 I assume I can get the firewall boys to open up 443 on our host and have it
 point to my machine.
.

Is that it? There's nothing else I may have missed when configuring just my 
application server to handle all HTTPS traffic?

Thank you very much,
Mal

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

why not just have the HTTP server running anyway.  It doesn't take much to s
et up and will give you more flexibility architecturally-wise.

I'd not recommend just using the web container on its own.  You may have a s
mall number of users now but what happens if you start to add more apps or t
he current app proves to be more 'popular'?

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Did you update the virtual hosts as well?


<simontaylor.email@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:597579207.1138274947848.JavaMail.wassrvr@ltsgwas007.sby.ibm.com...
> why not just have the HTTP server running anyway.  It doesn't take much to
> set up and will give you more flexibility architecturally-wise.
>
> I'd not recommend just using the web container on its own.  You may have a
> small number of users now but what happens if you start to add more apps
> or the current app proves to be more 'popular'?

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]