What are some of the advantages and disadvanatages to either doing ip-based or name-based hosting. i know that older browsers dont support name-based but who uses browsers with versions lower that 3.0 anyway.

The most obvious advantage is that you do not need to waste IP address space and you can squeeze hundreds of domains on a signle IP. The disadvantage is that if your customers want to run some particular server, they might not be able to depending on if someone else is already running it.

With name-based sites, you cannot run SSL and your customer cannot "test" thier site until thier domain name changes propigate (unless you create a temp address; http://www.your hostingcompany.com/customersite).

But with name-based hosting, it's so much easier to manage your IP lists because you will only have a couple.

Two serious disadvantages to name based hosting in my book:

1) You can't use SSL.

2) It is very difficult to accurately track all traffic caused by a domain if it's name based.

With name-based sites, you cannot run SSL and your customer cannot "test" thier site until thier domain name changes propigate (unless you create a temp address; http://www.your hostingcompany.com/customersite).

I think your wrong. Name based hosting gives the client their own IP address so they can test their site right away.

Name based = clients gets IP

IP based = everybody shares 1 IP

Originally posted by netsolutions


I think your wrong. Name based hosting gives the client their own IP address so they can test their site right away.

Name based = clients gets IP

IP based = everybody shares 1 IP


No, netsolutions. It's the other way around. ;)

Originally posted by netsolutions
Name based = clients gets IP

IP based = everybody shares 1 IP

Have you been moderating on /. recently?

Sorry about that you guys are right. Too early in the morning for me. I got confused about this on the Apache site. It says with IP based hosting many hosts can share the same IP. I took that in a different context. Sorry again

so what do most of you guys do? I mean i know that their will allways be people who just want to have a name-based account for VIP's and stuff but do most of you give you clients their own ip.

In my opinion i do beleive each client should have their own ip but ARIN i guess makes you justify why your doing ip-based hosting rather than name-based before they will give you more ips.

There really is no reason anymore other than SSL to give someone their own IP. AOL and all of the spiders have fixed their problems. Any anyone running IE3.01 or Netscape 3 should be shot :) or buy a network computer from Oracle.

Originally posted by smartbackups
Any anyone running IE3.01 or Netscape 3 should be shot

Actually, I think noth NS3 and IE3 support namebased hosting. I just tried it with an old NS3 copy and it works fine. I think the problem only exists with PRE 3.0 browsers (all 2 of them still in use worldwide)

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26203

Originally posted by RackMy.com
your customer cannot "test" thier site until thier domain name changes propigate (unless you create a temp address; http://www.your hostingcompany.com/customersite).


Why not http://ipadress/~username ?

Same thing :)

I just replied to another thread, about spam.
And it seems that spammers who run a bulk-mail script require an IP address (don't ask me why...), so, well, this would be an advantage of name-based hosting! :D

An extra note. You can use SSL, just not a personal or private, or whatever you want to call it. You can use a shared cert with it.