poole@eunet.ch writes:
To repeat: The second soloution proposed provides all aspects of provider independence. Why should we waste address space if wasting it does not provide significant additional functionality?
Because the customer wants something else (and they pay your wage too in the end).
I contest that the majority wants something different from my second soloution. Please re-read it.
Some do, some don't (up to now we have provided exactlly your solution, and some customers are completly content with it, others aren't). ....
But you can run a virtual server without wasting address space!
Naturally the correct solution would be for the HTTP protocol to pass the complete URL to the server, however it's too late for that.
Which I understand is fixed in the newest spec.
The problem is that I don't believe anybody that is -serious- about his server advertizing (for lots of money) http://www.xyz.com/ if it is not going to work with a -very- high percentage of browsers. Simon