Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 21:03:31 -0500 (EST) From: Bradley Dunn <bradley@dunn.org> To: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com> Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Apache Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970213205152.18204F-100000@ns2.harborcom.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970212121504.7569B-100000@alive.ampr.ab.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Marc Slemko wrote: > > Right now we're using the actuall domain names in the virtual server > > directives. Should we use the IP address instead? Would that ease the > > workload? > > You are wise to use IP addresses. If you are using a 1.2 beta, you would > also be wise to include a 'ServerName www.example.com' for each virtual > host. 1.1 will look it up on startup, but if it fails it will still keep > going. Because of the HTTP/1.1 support in 1.2, if either the forward or > reverse lookups fail and you don't have the IP in the virtualhost > definition and a servername for that host Apache will die. It is a double-edged sword. Using IP addresses means that if you ever renumber you have to go through and change every VirtualHost. I guess a perl script could kinda automate that, but my rule of thumb is no IP addresses in any config file they don't have to be in. On a more general note... Renumbering is a fact of life. All of us should be keeping that in mind when we are designing our networks. See: http://www.isi.edu/div7/pier/ for more info. pbd
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.970213205152.18204F-100000>