Hi Javier, why do you use an own POP3 and FTP for each customer/domain???? We are using the same POP3/FTP/SMTP for all customers. Of course you need individual Logins, you can solve this by naming them CUSTOMERNR-1, -2 and so on or by using DOMAINNAME-1, DOMAINNAME--2 and so on. For ftp, we do a CHROOT in the customers Webroot (=his home-dir). So where is the problem?? Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info@bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE "Javier Llopis" To: "lir-wg@ripe.net" <lir-wg@ripe.net> <javier@bitma cc: iler.com> Subject: Re: IP assignment for virtual webhosting Sent by: owner-lir-wg@ ripe.net 11.05.00 13:41 Please respond to "Javier Llopis" On Mon, 08 May 2000 18:26:19 +0200, Nurani Nimpuno wrote:

We do however wish to raise our concern regarding what we see as an inefficient usage of addresses in our limited address pool. We would therefore like to request the community to consider making it mandatory for NEW installations to use domain based web-hosting, with the exception of a set of agreed applications needing IP based web-hosting (eg. SSL).

There is one issue I'd like to bring up that we constantly run into and was never brought up in this debate, which somehow amazes me. Our typical situation is that when a customer orders a domain named web site it comes along with an FTP server and a POP-3 server so they can have their own email addresses. While we could host all customer pages on the same host with the same IP using HTTP 1.1, in order to do the same with the POP servers we need to distinguish the POP server by its single IP address, since there is no HTTP 1.1 equivalent for POP. So we end up with 99% of our domains having a different IP address each, in which case who _cares_ if we also use that IP address for the web server? Are we really wasting IP address space? Hasn't anybody run into this situation? If so, how are you dealing with it? We would ask that, unless a viable solution to this problem is found, name based hosting should be encouraged but not required. BTW we are adopting HTTP 1.1 name based virtual hosts anyway in case the FTP and POP issues could be solved. Regards Javier Llopis BitMailer, S.L. javier@bitmailer.com Juan Bravo 51, Dup. 1-Izq Tel: +34 91 402 1551 28006 Madrid Fax: +34 91 402 4115 SPAIN