On 18 juil. 2011, at 23:25, Peter B wrote: > Thank you Patrick, that does make sense, I'll do some more reading up.. > > I'm actually starting to think it might just be easier to host all the sites on one server, although sooner or later I'm going to need to do this anyhow. that's for sure. A single Apache server is easier to manage and configure that many. "Keep It Simple" is a good rule. Think about a security update: you would have to deploy it on every virtual box servers, instead of doing it only once. That's to be taken into account too. >> From: patrick.proniewski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:16:36 +0200 >> To: users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jc_denton_1372@xxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: Re: Virtual Hosts on physical servers >> >> Your proxy can be an Apache Server, with mod_proxy, setup to forward client requests for www.hello.com to server1, and www.test.com to server2. That's not an unusual setup. Patrick PRONIEWSKI -- Administrateur Système - DSI - Université Lumière Lyon 2
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
|