On 4/25/06, Wesley W. Terpstra <
wesley@terpstra.ca> wrote:
> > hello relative hosts/paths
> ... except that both javascript and HTTP redirects require a complete
> URL.
Easily determined by using HTTP_HOST, SERVER_NAME and REQUIRE_URI in the
environment (and also in the browser by javascript:
document.location.hostname).
... think about the effect what you propose would have on cookies.
What show-stopping defect would it create? Does Lurker even use cookies?
I thought it forces it to use the ServerName apache setting. I'm
> pretty sure, even.
Sorry, I said hostname but meant ServerName.
what 'www' actually loads when you punch it into your URL bar. If you
> can't access the webserver by its public name, something is wrong I'd
> say.
There was a site I visited quite frequently whose DNS host decided to
blacklist mine. It was more of a pain because they were using
UseCanonicalName On, so I couldn't just use the IP address to get there
without modifying a bunch of host files or redirecting DNS requests for that
domain at my LAN's cache. Granted, something was wrong, but it needlessly
interfered with working around the issue (the host's DNS issue was not
corrected for over 6 months).
I also find it convenient to have separate, short LAN hostnames going to the
LAN-side IP addresses and the public hosts going to the Internet IP
addresses.
Server setups are personal preference, why assume and enforce a certain
configuration unnecessarily when it's as easy to keep it flexible?
On 4/25/06, Wesley W. Terpstra <
wesley@terpstra.ca> wrote:
> hello relative hosts/paths... except that both javascript and HTTP redirects require a completeURL.Easily determined by using HTTP_HOST, SERVER_NAME and REQUIRE_URI in the environment (and also in the browser by javascript:
document.location.hostname).... think about the effect what you propose would have on cookies.
What show-stopping defect would it create? Does Lurker even use cookies?
I thought it forces it to use the ServerName apache setting. I'mpretty sure, even.Sorry, I said hostname but meant ServerName.
what 'www' actually loads when you punch it into your URL bar. If you
can't access the webserver by its public name, something is wrong I'dsay.There was a site I visited quite frequently whose DNS host decided to blacklist mine. It was more of a pain because they were using UseCanonicalName On, so I couldn't just use the IP address to get there without modifying a bunch of host files or redirecting DNS requests for that domain at my LAN's cache. Granted, something was wrong, but it needlessly interfered with working around the issue (the host's DNS issue was not corrected for over 6 months).
I also find it convenient to have separate, short LAN hostnames going to the LAN-side IP addresses and the public hosts going to the Internet IP addresses.Server setups are personal preference, why assume and enforce a certain configuration unnecessarily when it's as easy to keep it flexible?
(text/plain)