"John A. Tamplin" wrote:
Well, if the policy is that you have to use name-based hosting everywhere feasible and do something different for those customers that need something different, that can be quite a hardship on existing setups. For example, re-engineering all the tools to create and maintain vdom services, changing existing customer setups, etc. It is certainly easier to treat all hosting customers alike, rather than have completely separate setups and then have to change a customer from one to the other when they add or delete services (including downtime).
That was also brought up at the meeting, however it was generally agreed that the address savings were worth the work.
Another issue nobody has mentioned is security between virtual servers. Under name-based hosting, they all run as the same user-id and thus to get the same security you have with separate IP-based servers you have to put all the access conrol checks in all the tools that can be used. This can be hard if not impossible to do when you allow full shell access to the files used by the server.
Not if you chroot() the user into their file space. That may not be ideal, but there are ways to deal with it. Alec -- Alec H. Peterson - ahp@hilander.com Staff Scientist CenterGate Research Group - http://www.centergate.com "Technology so advanced, even _we_ don't understand it!"