httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <...@algroup.co.uk>
Subject Re: more vhost thoughts
Date Sun, 05 Oct 1997 15:35:22 GMT
Marc Slemko wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 5 Oct 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> 
> > 2.
> >
> > The Port directive is a non-intuitive mess when applied to vhosts.  Consider:
> >
> >     <VirtualHost 127.0.0.1>
> >       Port 8080
> >     </VirtualHost>
> >
> > That's a vhost on port 80, which will issue redirects indicating port 8080.
> > Solution?
> 
> I am more concerned about the case where someone makes a vhost on a
> different port (eg. main server port 80, vhost 8080) and forget the Port
> directive.  I'm afraid I'm not entirely clear on what the Port directive
> does that can't be figured out by what port something is really on.

Confuses me, too ... if I want to have hosts on two ports I usually do
something like:

Port 80
Listen 81

<VirtualHost foo:81>
.
.
.
</VirtualHost>

I still haven't figured out why I have to do the Listen (conceptually,
that is, rather than what the code does).

Cheers,

Ben.

-- 
Ben Laurie            |Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435|Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant  |Fax:   +44 (181) 994 6472|http://www.apache.org
and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |Apache-SSL author
A.L. Digital Ltd,     |http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL
London, England.      |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache

Mime
View raw message