From owner-freebsd-isp Sun Mar 8 08:48:13 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA13663 for freebsd-isp-outgoing; Sun, 8 Mar 1998 08:48:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from etinc.com (et-gw.etinc.com [207.252.1.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA13658 for ; Sun, 8 Mar 1998 08:48:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dennis@etinc.com) Received: from dbws.vastnet.net (port56.netsvr1.cst.vastnet.net [207.252.73.56]) by etinc.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA03667; Sun, 8 Mar 1998 11:56:23 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980308114858.006f4934@etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 11:49:01 -0500 To: mikel@cynet.net.au, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG From: Dennis Subject: Re: To IP or not to IP WWW servers Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 07:14 PM 3/8/98 +1000, mikel@cynet.net.au wrote: >With IP space dwindling what are the lists thoughts on using individual IP >addresses for each Virtual Web Service host as opposed to "overloading" >the single IP address of the VWS server with multiple hostname/domain >names? IRTT how has choosing individual IPs versus single IP/multiple VWS >impacted on your customer base? > >Also, at what point do the practical limits start getting reached with >aliasing IPs onto the VWS server card, or are they sufficiently high that >other issues such as capacity/reliability come into play first? You may have trouble doing traffic management with virtual web service as most of the limitation products on the market (including ours) work on IP addresses. db To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message