Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 17:11:12 -0800 (PST) From: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" <ejs@bfd.com> To: Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com> Cc: Ron Bickers <rbickers@intercenter.net>, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Apache Virtual Servers (single IP) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970218170829.8975A-100000@harlie> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.93.970218155238.9256B-100000@sidhe.memra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 18 Feb 1997, Michael Dillon wrote: > > Just like the clueless ISPs that went to dynamic IP addresses for dialup > > customers? There were a lot of complaints about that, but it's pretty > > much the norm now. > > There's nothing clueless about using dynamic IP's for dialup. It makes > sense to only use as many IP's as you have interfaces for, i.e. one per > modem port. But virtual domains are servers and are a whole different > ballgame. You need to have a globally unique IP address in order for the > WWW server to be globally visible. Whether or not you run this website on > a shared piece of equipment is a separate decision and should not be > visible to the world, thus unique IP addresses for each domain. We offer two services that don't work at all with the HTTP 1.1 virtual hosts. 1: Virtual FTP 2: Virtual HTTPS The first is never told what server the client actually wanted to connect to, the second needs to know before the client has the chance to tell. I can see a need for the non-IP virtual domains, but there is also a need for the IP based ones, though I can see an ISP charging a little more for one.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.970218170829.8975A-100000>