httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dietz, Phil E." <>
Subject RE: VirtualHost directive and IPv6
Date Wed, 16 Jun 1999 15:42:36 GMT
Can't yuou just have your own IPV6 based container directive ?? 

	<VirtualHostIPV6  DEAD.BEEF.HEX.ADDR 8080>

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Manoj Kasichainula []
	Sent:	Wednesday, June 16, 1999 10:40 AM
	Subject:	Re: VirtualHost directive and IPv6

	On Tue, Jun 15, 1999 at 04:14:22PM +0900, wrote:
	> 	I have some trouble about syntax of <VirtualHost> directive.
	> 	It takes multiple "host" or "host:port" as argument.
However, as
	> 	IPv6 address will be written as colon-separated
	> 	we cannot use "host:port" for IPv6 addresses (it is
	> 	I would like to know about your opinion on how I should
update the
	> 	syntax.  We have several choices here:
	> 	- introduce new separater, like "host/port"
	> 	- disable multiple "host:port" against VirtualHost
	> 	  and let the user <VirtualHost host port> syntax.
	> 	- some others

	The decision depends on which version you're aiming the patch for.
	a 1.3.7, I don't think any config file format changes would be
	allowed. I don't know enough about the colon-separated form of IPv6
	addresses; how many different fields are there?

	This is a gross hack, but maybe you could count the number of fields
	and determine the protocol version based on that? = 2 fields => IPv4 with port
	01:23:45:67:89:ab:cd:ef:80 = 9 fields => IPv6 with port
	01:23:45:67:89:ab:cd:ef = 8 fields => IPv6 without port

	Another way would be to prefix all IPv6 addresses with "IPv6:".

	For a 2.0 release, anything is possible. I wouldn't disable multiple
	"host:port"'s, though.

	Manoj Kasichainula - manojk at io dot com -
	"Some people have entirely too much free time on their hands."
	  - Gene Spafford (spaf)

View raw message