Are there advantages to having your own IP on a machine that hosts multiple sites instead of virtualing.

I've seen the argument and it makes that sense that virtual hosting is a little slower cause you have to resolve the name at the machine, but this seems minor compared to all the other things you don't know about that can slow a server down.

Are there any limitations on what you can do with virtual hosting?

If you are referring to IP based vs name based, the only big thing is SSL. You cannot use an SSL Certificate on name based hosting. Other than that, there's not too much of a difference as a user.

-Dan

This gets asked like at least once every single week. Virtual hosting is not any slower. The same DNS lookups get done in both cases. The only advantages to having a dedicated IP address are SSL certificates, true anonymous FTP, and maybe wildcards (having *.yourdomain.ext go to your web site).

Another advantage of having a dedicated IP for your account is being able to manage your account (editing/viewing) before your domain name is transferred to your new host.

Well, most places should have a way to view your web site before transferring the domain name, such as http://www.yourhost.ext/~username/

Originally posted by ToastyX
and maybe wildcards (having *.yourdomain.ext go to your web site).

Wildcards can be done without your own IP no problem.

Originally posted by ID2000
Another advantage of having a dedicated IP for your account is being able to manage your account (editing/viewing) before your domain name is transferred to your new host.

Also not true, as pointed out in the post above :)

Oops, I forgot Apache supports wildcards in ServerAlias. Most control panels don't allow an easy way to do this though.

I've not been able to find a way to get FrontPage to publish to a http://host.com/~username/ while waiting for a domain to catch up. I don't have/use FrontPage myself but have worked with customers that have tried everything we could think of. No problems with regular FTP though, it's just a FP thing.

If anyone knows how to get FP to do this, I'd be grateful. :)

What I am doing for FP users now, is giving them an IP to publish to then after the domain is resolved, editing the necessary files and moving them to the shared IP . . . a real pain.

Thanks

The fastest way to do it, is have your clients add your nameserver to their desktop. This way when they try to reach their host, they are getting there through your dns, and they will always have the most recent record. Just be sure to put it BEFORE their ISP's nameservers.

-Dan

OK Dan,

I'm going to be the one who asks the ignorant question here. How does a client do that? How do they add a hosts nameservers to their 'desktop'? If it's an easy enough process I bet it would stop a lot of these pesky DNS questions we get while clients are waiting for their domains to resolve.

Depending on which OS they use the process differs slightly. It's been awhile, but this should be close enough. On the win9x machines they would go to the control panel --> network --> select tcp/ip --> properties --> DNS Configuration --> type in your nameserver and hit Add. On NT based achines, it's pretty much the same deal slightly different places thoug. On macOS they would edit their profile in their tcp/ip settings in the control panel menu.

Hope that helps.

-Dan

Anonymous ftp would of course require a user to have his own IP address just like ssl does.

Originally posted by serve-you
The fastest way to do it, is have your clients add your nameserver to their desktop. This way when they try to reach their host, they are getting there through your dns, and they will always have the most recent record. Just be sure to put it BEFORE their ISP's nameservers.

-Dan


Maybe this isn't the way you intended it, but this could be percieved as being a bit 'sneaky'. The client goes to his website to check if its up or whatever, and of course it is, but because it is going through your servers, he has no idea how its working for everyone but him. Then there is always the possibility of playing with the DNS records, so that they don't work the way they are suppose to (taking control of domains your not suppose to, etc.)

Again, I'm saying this was your intention or anything. I just think it is better to allow the client to use independent third parties for verification whenever possible.

maxwello

Originally posted by maxwello



Maybe this isn't the way you intended it, but this could be percieved as being a bit 'sneaky'. The client goes to his website to check if its up or whatever, and of course it is, but because it is going through your servers, he has no idea how its working for everyone but him. Then there is always the possibility of playing with the DNS records, so that they don't work the way they are suppose to (taking control of domains your not suppose to, etc.)

Again, I'm saying this was your intention or anything. I just think it is better to allow the client to use independent third parties for verification whenever possible.

maxwello
Of course this could be taken this way, but who cares? The point of having them add the nameserver to their desktop is to allow them to access their domain name before it propagates. I don't really see how this is "sneaky". You are not telling your clients to use your nameservers, you are offering it as a solution.

And could you please explain how adding a DNS address to your desktop allows you to "take control of domains your not suppose to"?

-Dan

Originally posted by serve-you
And could you please explain how adding a DNS address to your desktop allows you to "take control of domains your not suppose to"?

-Dan

If your customers are using your DNS, you could do just about anything with the records, (setup webhostingtalk.com to go to your site for example).

I just think its best to keep those things independent and third-party. It does sound like a possible solution to allow your clients to see the most recent changes, just a bit questionable.

maxwello

HELLO?
If they are your hosting customers you already manage their DNS. This is exactly what this thread is about. When a customer signs up with a hosting company, they either register a domain, or transfer one to the host. The host creates the necessary records for you to be able to reach that site via www, ftp mail, etc.

When these changes are made, it can take up to a week for slow DNS caches to clear and start using the new records (this is propagation). If your customer just happens to be behind one of these slow name servers, they will be unable to access their domain name until the propagation happens. By having them add your nameserver to their desktop, they can query the nameserver that has the correct entry, and will be able to reach their domain right away.

Make a little more sense now?

-Dan

HELLO?
If they are your hosting customers you already manage their DNS.

HELLO?
I'm not talking about their domains.

Geez, no reason to get hostile. I'm not attacking you or anything, just discussing potential pitfalls/issues with the method you suggest.

Anyway, hopefully their ISP is handeling their DNS, not a hosting provider. Which is my whole point. Another thing, many hosting providers DNS servers are not setup to respond properly to requests on domains other than those they manage. Do you even want every single DNS request a client makes while browsing to go to your servers? I guess it's ok if you don't mind paying for the bandwidth.

<snip condescending explanation>
Make a little more sense now?

-Dan

I understand DNS and propagation just fine thanks. Thanks for the wonderful explanation though.

maxwello

So what happens if you got them to add your nameservers to their dns config, but their client gets outdated info because it chose to use one of the other nameservers listed?

What you might do instead, is to get them to add the correct info to their hosts file (often found at c:\Windows\hosts) like this...

Open c:\Windows\hosts in Notepad
add the following new line at the end of the file...

123.231.112.211 theirdomain.com www.theirdomain.com

Save the file.

Restart the web browser (IExplorer)
They should be able to access their site just fine now.

You may want to send them a reminder a week later to remove the line. :) Incidentally, that is what that file is for (name resolving without remote lookups), may as well use it. :)

I am not being hostile, just trying to make you understand the situation, which appearantly you still do not. We are talking about their domain name not their personal computer. The host is always responsible for the DNS of a domain name that they host, with the rare exception of those who choose to use a 3rd party DNS service like easydns. How would an ISP handle a domain name for which they do not have any authority over?

The point that you seem to be missing here, is that we are not saying that your customers should use your nameserver instead of their ISP. It is in addition to. Of course you do not want all of your customers using your name servers for all of their requests. This is a temporary solution to gat around propagation.

-Dan

Originally posted by serve-you
I am not being hostile, just trying to make you understand the situation, which appearantly you still do not.
"Make me understand"? That sounds pleasent, does it involve some sort of water torture? ;)
I understand just fine thanks. Maybe you don't understand.

We are talking about their domain name not their personal computer. The host is always responsible for the DNS of a domain name that they host

Exactly. We are talking about their domain name... So why would you ask them to add your DNS server to their pc? (rhetorical. please don't restate your first point. Which, whether you want to believe it or not, I do understand.)

The point that you seem to be missing here, is that we are not saying that your customers should use your nameserver instead of their ISP.

But you are telling them to use your server as the default for their network settings, sending all requests to your server first. This brings up another point, the clients browsing speed could be reduced because it has to wait for your server to timeout or say, "i don't have information on that domain, go somewhere else."

Of course you do not want all of your customers using your name servers for all of their requests.

Then why even bring it up in the first place?

This is a temporary solution to gat around propagation.
-Dan

It seems like an pretty complicated and undesirable solution to a temporary problem. What are the chances the average user is going to edit their DNS in the first place, and then change them back again later?

maxwello

No one is asking you to do this, or to tell anyone else to. Someone asked for a solution to the problem of not being able to access a host on a name based IP before it propagates. This is a solution to that problem. Don't like the solution? Don't use it.

For those who asked, you have your answer. I'll leave it at that.

-Dan

Originally posted by serve-you
No one is asking you to do this, or to tell anyone else to. Someone asked for a solution to the problem of not being able to access a host on a name based IP before it propagates. This is a solution to that problem. Don't like the solution? Don't use it.

For those who asked, you have your answer. I'll leave it at that.

-Dan

And, for those who asked, they have a better idea of what this answer may entail, and the possible issues involved.

That is after all what these discussions / forums are all about, right? ;)

maxwello

Wow, great discussion guys. No, seriously! You guys got a little miffed at each other, but the info you provided in this thread is fantastic and very useful.

Just FYI - If you're using Windows 2000 or Windows XP, your host file is going to be in a different location. I use Windows 2000 and mine is at:

c:\winnt\system32\drivers\etc\hosts

*nix based systems also have a hosts file, so if you have any clients using Linux or something, you could have them add their IP / domain to their hosts file as well.

Interestingly enough, back in the day before DNS existed, the hostname to IP resolution process for the entire Internet was based on a really big "hosts" file.

I agree with Jay Suds, to work on a web site before a DNS transfer takes place, I recommend just adding the stuff to your hosts file.

On windows 95/98/ME, it's the \windows\hosts file.

Wow, been a long time since I typed a backslash.