Date: Tue, 23 Jul 96 20:19:55 +0300 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@gns.com.br> To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Virtual domains? (fwd) Message-ID: <9607231719.AA0111@DANIEL.gns.net.br>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm not sure if the virtual domains question came from here or current, but... Forwarded message: > > >> "Software Virtual Servers" are part of the http/1.1 standard (proposed), > >> and were first implememted by the Netscape servers. One thing to remember > >> with these "non-ip based" virtual servers is that to date, only Netscape > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> Navigator sends the required HEADER to let the web server know the NAME of > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> the domain it's after. So if most of your hits are coming from Nav. 2.0 or > >> higher, it's safe to use Software Virtual Servers. If you have a lot of > >> hits from places like AOL or Compuserve, however, it would be a bad idea > >> to implement either Netscape's or Apache's new virtual domain method. > > > >Is that so? > > No. Lynx2-5 sends a Host: header as described in the > HTTP/1.1 working drafts. > > I don't know about AOL/Compuserve, but I'd be surprised > if the current client didn't. The July 1996 HTTP/1.1 RFC is in > last call, and the procedure is not "new" at this point (been > in wide use for more than a year). Which remind me I should check if the lynx port has already been updated to, at least, 2-5. It should be a matter of two minutes, *after* understanding the port process (:-), since 2-5FM (I don't know about 2-5) has been accepting "make freebsd" and "make freebsd-ncurses" (which requires an additional -DNCURSESHEADER to be inserted) for some time now... -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@gns.com.br e8917523@linf.unb.br
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9607231719.AA0111>