[6215] in North American Network Operators' Group
"Virtual" web servers (was Re: IP Allocation)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Martin Cooper)
Wed Nov 20 10:20:23 1996
From: Martin Cooper <mjc@cooper.org.uk>
Reply-to: mjc@cooper.org.uk
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 20 Nov 1996 14:02:57 GMT."
<199611201402.OAA15849@diamond.xara.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 15:05:51 +0000
Lyndon Levesley wrote:
> Michael Dillon wrote :
> -> On Tue, 19 Nov 1996, Pete Davis wrote:
> ->
> -> > With all this talk of IP Allocation, does anybody know of a time frame
> -> > for Prodigy/AOL/Compuserve to become HTML 1.1 compliant?
> -> >
> -> > We have been trying to conserve IP space wherever possible, but the inab
> -> ility
> -> > for 6+ million people to see "software virtuals" based on HTML 1.1 has p
> -> revented
> -> > us from transitioning from /32's for each site to one single /32 for tho
> -> usands.
> ->
> -> Selling a virtual website without allocating a unique IP address is fraud
> -> and will continue to be fraud for the next few years.
> ->
>
> Surely that's only the case if you misrepresent the service you're selling
> when you market/sell it ?
>
> It would be nice to see some stats about the percentage of 1.1 compliant
> browsers that people are using, such as what percentage of web hits to
> a reasonable sample of sites are made from "antiquated" browsers ? I imagine
> that as soon as that figure fell below 1% then the product wouldn't be
> entirely unmarketable.
[ ... ]
Am I getting confused here myself, or are we talking about HTTP/1.1
rather than HTML 1.1 ?
One good reason at the moment for not moving to only providing support
for HTTP/1.1 is the lack of support for it in lynx, which many blind
people use as a browser, and lack of support for which by ISPs would
probably be fairly politically unpopular.
I guess in terms of misrepresentation we're talking about the
fairly established term "virtual web server" which I would say
has been fairly well established in common parlance as being
indistinguishable from a real web server, so an HTTP/1.1
only server at the moment could probably be said to not always
meet that definition given the above.
M
--
Martin Cooper
Work <mjc@xara.net> | Personal <mjc@cooper.org.uk>
