Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 21:40:25 +0200 From: Gabriel Ambuehl <gabriel_ambuehl@buz.ch> To: "f.johan.beisser" <jan@caustic.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re[2]: IP vs CNAME Message-ID: <105123841554.20000602214025@buz.ch> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006021222310.87193-100000@pogo.caustic.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006021222310.87193-100000@pogo.caustic.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> generally, i think it's better to do IP based virtualhosting. > it's not so much of a performance issue, it just makes it cleaner with > older browsers, and makes it easier to track problems with servers. Considering the fact that IPs are getting rare (US people don't notice this as likely as we in Europe. RIPE would kill small ISPs doing IP based virtualhosting) I would suggest to do standard non-IP (AKA HTTP 1.1) virtualhosting. If you think you'll have enough IPs until you get new ones (and that could be delayed until IPv6 is widely available) you should do IP based virtualhosting. In any other cases, I'd suggest to use simple namebased virtualhosts. Things change if you want to offer SSL or anonymous FTP, of course. BTW: Why is my BIND complaining about zonefiles without any A records but just CNAMES? If I add ONE single A record, it stops complaining... Is there a way to get it working without a bogus record for such "CNAME only" domains? Best regards, Gabriel To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?105123841554.20000602214025>