Re: Decision about Host?
Balint Nagy Endre (bne@bne.ind.eunet.hu)
Fri, 6 Oct 1995 00:52:25 +0100 (MET)
>Jeffrey Mogul writes:
> Balint Nagy Endre writes:
> Jeffrey Mogul writes:
> > How about
> > (1) clients SHOULD transmit the FQDN
> > (2) the HTTP 1.x protocol DOES NOT SUPPORT server hosts with
> > semantically different bindings to multiple FQDNs
> > if any pair of those FQDNs share a common prefix.
>
> Oops. Most ISPs want to have
> www.isp.net
> www.customer1.com
> www.customer2.com
> ....
> www.customerN.com
> on a single host, because their customers want the illusion of their
> own web server.
>
> I'm against this idea categorically.
>
> Good point about the current naming schemes. But then what does it
> mean if a client sends:
>
> Host: www
>
> To me, this is an error, and the server can report it as such.
> What else could it possibly do?
>
> So perhaps I would modify
> > (3) server administrators SHOULD NOT configure servers
> > in violation of rule (2).
> to be
> (3) servers MUST return an error [to be specified] if
> a client sends a semantically ambiguous prefix in a
> Host: header.
300 Multipe choices would be fine.
Andrew.
>