httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexei Kosut <>
Subject Re: [2.0] proposed vhost config rewrite
Date Mon, 09 Jun 1997 19:48:13 GMT
On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:


> <PortMatch PP ...>
>     ...
>     <IPMatch a.b.c.d ...>
> 	...
> 	<HostMatch ... ...>
> 	    ...
> 	</HostMatch>
> 	...
>     </IPMatch>
>     ...
> <PortMatch>

I like this. I assume this would apply to every directive? I think
that, like Ben said, a bit more flexibility might be in order; so you
could mix and match PortMatch and IPMatch. (HostMatch should probably
only be allowed inside the two, not outside.) And maybe defaults of 80
and *.*.*.*.

Should be we using IP addresses at all? I know that for
high-performance sites its useful, but aren't they deprecated (and I
know I've spelled that wrong) for user-level use? Although they do
make things simpler to implement and understand. I think that's the
main problem with the current approach. It's too complicated to figure
out, and violates one of the basic principles of human interface
design (no hidden mode switches).


> I haven't dealt with ServerPath.  (I'm assuming ServerAlias will merge
> into HostMatch.) 

ServerPath's not a problem. Just define it so it only works inside a
HostMatch, and it'll work peachy (assuming the code's there).

Alexei Kosut <>      The Apache HTTP Server

View raw message