nanog mailing list archives
Re: multihoming without BGP
From: Marc Slemko <marcs () znep com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:09:35 -0600 (MDT)
On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Dana Hudes wrote:
Paul A Vixie wrote:But there's no guarantee that you need separate addresses per home page. If you don't count Lynx or Mosaic as part of your target audience, then you can depend on the "Host:" keyword sent in queries by *all* modern browsers.I had to jump in here with a correction and clarification. We are using Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0. The 'software virtual server' feature doesn't work with any version of Netscape Navigator up to and including Communicator Preview 5. The server sees a HTTP 1.0 not HTTP 1.1 request. In my logs I do see some webcrawlers sending HTTP 1.1 so it isn't completely a server issue. Netscape Enterprise 3.0 is coming out RSN but I don't know that it will be any better. If it is I'll speak up here.
This does not belong on nanog, but to set the facts straight: if Netscape Enterprise 2.0 supports Host: based virtual hosts but only for hosts that make HTTP/1.1 requests that is lame. Versions of Navigator have sent Host: headers for some time; so has MSIE. Last I knew, AOL's proxies didn't yet because they were too lazy. The vast majority of clients do send Host: headers even though they aren't HTTP/1.1. HTTP/1.1 clients _have_ to send the Host: header, but HTTP/1.0 clients may and most do. I do not advocate using them yet for most websites, but that is another issue.
Current thread:
- Re: multihoming without BGP Paul A Vixie (Jun 10)
- Re: multihoming without BGP Robert E. Seastrom (Jun 11)
- Re: multihoming without BGP Randy Bush (Jun 11)
- Re: multihoming without BGP Paul A Vixie (Jun 11)
- Re: multihoming without BGP Dana Hudes (Jun 13)
- Re: multihoming without BGP Marc Slemko (Jun 13)
- Re: multihoming without BGP Paul A Vixie (Jun 13)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: multihoming without BGP Rodney Joffe (Jun 11)
- Re: multihoming without BGP Vadim Antonov (Jun 11)