From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Dec 23 12:46: 0 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from phoenix.volant.org (phoenix.volant.org [205.179.79.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A818815747 for ; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:45:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from patl@phoenix.volant.org) Received: from asimov.phoenix.volant.org ([205.179.79.65]) by phoenix.volant.org with esmtp (Exim 1.92 #8) for freebsd-isp@freebsd.org id 121F7U-0007CK-00; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:45:56 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by asimov.phoenix.volant.org (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA24593 for ; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:45:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:45:54 -0800 (PST) From: patl@phoenix.volant.org Reply-To: patl@phoenix.volant.org Subject: Virtual hosts: IP aliases on de0 or lo0 ? To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I'm setting up a new server for virtual hosting (HTTP, FTP, IMAP/POP, etc.) It will have a single network interface; and probably only a relatively small number of virtual hosts. (Running FreeBSD 3.3R, 3.4R, or -STABLE) What are the relative merits of putting the IP aliases on the network interface (de0) as versus the loopback interface (lo0) ? Would there be any benefits at all to creating additional loopback interfaces instead of aliasing? (I suspect not; but would like to hear from someone more knowlegable about why.) The factors I'm most interested in are those relating to security, performance, and the ability to easily monitor the bandwidth used by each virtual host; although I would like to hear about any other factors. I would also be interested in hearing about anything that might be in -CURRENT, or planned for 4.x that might affect these decisions. Thanks, -Pat To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message