From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Feb 13 18:03:49 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA27653 for isp-outgoing; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 18:03:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns2.harborcom.net (root@ns2.harborcom.net [206.158.4.4]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA27642 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 18:03:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (bradley@localhost) by ns2.harborcom.net (8.8.5/8.8.4) with SMTP id VAA27379; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 21:03:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 21:03:31 -0500 (EST) From: Bradley Dunn X-Sender: bradley@ns2.harborcom.net To: Marc Slemko cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Apache In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-isp@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk 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