We have HTTPD 2.2 with several IP-based VirtualHost definitions. Now one of our partners wants to add some name-based vhosts, and it would be convenient to just keep using the same address:port as their existing application. What I mean to do is just add another VirtualHost for each application, a NameVirtualHost fingering the address:port pair, and ensure that the existing vhost is parsed first so it becomes the default for no-name requests. Will this work? Am I nuts? The description of the way the address:port name lists are built and used seems to imply that I can get away with this. But then there's a bit about name- and IP-based vhosts being unable to "interfere", which makes me uncertain. -- Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mwood@xxxxxxxxx Friends don't let friends publish revisable-form documents.
Attachment:
pgpcCoFkJ0Uh4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
|