Thanks for your replies,
I'll go with what I've written then, so that who wants may evaluate the patches, (they'll be provided into a separate lisp file, the will override some hunchentoot functions).
The modifications will be available in one day or two into claw project registered at common-lisp.net

For what concerning the example on port, it was just an example, to make present that in some environment, asking configuration modifications to the edp group of a cutomer, may result a pain (I speak for experience).

Thx for suggestions,
Have a nice day,

kiuma
On Jan 17, 2008 10:09 AM, Nicolas Neuss <neuss@math.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote:
"Andrea Chiumenti" < kiuma72@gmail.com> writes:

> Anyway since my project seems the only with the need of different
> sessions, I'll try another approach that doesn't involve hunchentoot for
> my needs, before publishing the first commit.  Have a nice day, kiuma

I also have three SBCL/hunchentoot servers running on the same machine
which could be replaced by one with the help of your patches.  So, in
principle I would be interested in this feature if it could be integrated
in Hunchentoot nicely.  However, even if such a version of Hunchentoot
would be available I am not sure if running only one instance would be a
good idea, since a bug in one application would wreak havoc on all.

[I must admit that I had no problems in asking our computing center for more
open ports.  If this would not have worked, I probably would have put my
servers behind Apache/modlisp (which I probably will do anyway at some
point, because people occasionally reported problems accessing my servers
from places which allowed only connections on port 8080).]

Nicolas

_______________________________________________