(check freshmeat) ProFTPd seems to use the same interface that Apache uses to give you multiple domains under one IP which remain seperate from each other
Sorry, this doesn't work. FTP doesn't follow the concept of a host header. If you read the documentation for ProFTPd it states that while it can do hosting for many domains on the same box, each domain must have its own IP address.
I find it absolutely pathetic that the browser microsoft ships with NT 4 makes it impossible to get to their website to download the newest version.
Is this because it's not sending host headers? I know that's why we can't access any of the sites we do vhosting for, but is ms using virtual hosted sites?
We've been looking into implementing a setup like this.
The only thing that keeps us from doing it is that our virtual hosting clients need FTP access to their sites.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see a simple solution for this. HTTP file transfers are not an option for security reasons.
I'd really like to do this. Sit something like an OpenBSD box on the dirty side and run Linux behind it. You could even use something like a Mac or Netware server in that place that are fairly secure.
What can people do with a workstation that would be
impractical or silly to do with a mainframe? (besides play Pacman...)
What software techniques can take advantage of all those extra cycles
lying around?
Anyone else feeling frustrated because of a strong desire to post a reply to these guys?
I mean, wouldn't you just love to jump into this conversation:
Aucbvax.2628
fa.unix-wizards
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!unix-wizards
Tue Aug 11 11:41:44 1981
Flaming Psychologists
>From mo@LBL-UNIX Tue Aug 11 11:23:32 1981
Well, you see what kind of stuff gets into DATAMATION.
I don't understand these things: many of the criticisms
are right, but the facts are categorically wrong! Unix
could benefit from some "normalizaion" (the Software Tools
benefitted greatly from having been written all at once, not
over the years), but the claim that Unix does not present
a simple set of principles is the most incomprehensible
statement he could have made! That is ALL Unix does,
and that is precisely why he doesn't like it! If he hates
it so much, why doesn't he go get an account on a TOPS-10 system
or since he is at UCSD, a UCSD PASCAL machine?
Well, enough of that. I yield the floor to Lauren.
-Mike
Aucbvax.2384
fa.unix-wizards
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!WITTMEYER@USC-ISI
Tue Jul 21 08:47:52 1981
REMOVAL FROM MAILING LISTS
From: WITTMEYER at USC-ISI
WE WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE OUR NAME FORM THE UNIX-WIZARDS
MAILING LIST. THE ACCOUNT NAME TO BE REMOVED FROM THE
LIST IS:
I really enjoyed reading through NET.cooks. It always amazes me that most of my fellow geeks are great cooks (or at least try to be). This was also evidenced by the the discussion following the grilling/. poll.
I definately see this as a worthwhile project. Many libraries of inner city schools would benefit from a free cataloguing[sp?] system.
While this seems to make sense, it's not really true.
As part of our client base, we have about 14 school districts and around 40 libraries. Most of these are using pretty advanced library management software (such as Follett or Athena) and not one of them has had to pay for it.
Grants for this kind of thing abound. We have people cold calling them wanting to give them money to put in NT servers and software.
The problem comes in when the grant money is spent and they can't afford to keep the equipment up, or to pay the line and ISP charges for their Internet connection.
I'm not saying it's not a worthwhile project, I just want people to be aware that there probably aren't a whole lot of libraries who would jump on something just because it was free. It's got to be better.
You can mail most documents created in Microsoft® Word 6.0 or later, WordPerfect® 6.0 or later, PageMaker® 6.5 or later, VENTURA(TM) 7.0 or later, or QuarkXPress(TM) 3.2 or later.
I didn't exactly mean tax money. I was alluding (too vaguely I guess) to that extra penny you have to shell out for stamps now. The longer you've been around, the more pennies. For me, I remember when it was 20 cents.
And you don't think UPS could charge a little less if they didn't need to spend your money on advertising?
You obviously don't understand. While operating only on UPS/FedEx/etc in a large metro area may be very profitable, you wouldn't be able to afford to send many first class letters delivered to a Rural Route address in the middle of nowhere.
The USPS *must* provide equal services to all citizens of the US. That is why the government is involved. It is their mandate.
I hope I have somehow eased your mind on this issue and let you sleep well tonight.
I mean, everyone in the US could get a hotmail account (I know, I know... but...) and not have to pay $0.41 per message. This is where the whole plan breaks down.
Sure, we can set up a hotmail account for everyone, but how are all those without 'net access going to get it? There are TONS of low income/technophobe/elderly folks who won't be able to participate.
The last machine I "bought" was an Apple II. I haven't had a PC that I didn't build up from parts. Obviously in this situation, I don't have a Windows license.
I'd say a much larger population of Linux users may have purchased a box with Win3.x installed on it, but have home built since then.
In that case, they'd at least have to buy the upgrade.
Yes, but they don't force the homeowner to research how to operate the lock in the first place... then check every day or so to see if they need to have their locks changed because of a defect in the supplied lock (or the key;)
When we do web sites for clients, our contract stipulates that we will insure support for browsers up to 2 years old. Guess who's about to get axed?
When we discuss the issues with backward compatibility with Netscape, a lot of these guys who are just getting into the 'net don't even recongnize the name. Although we try to counsel them on the small portion of their audience that may still be using it, to them it's not worth the extra effort (read: money) to accomodate them. They need a flashy product out there NOW and they want it to look good on their desktop... IE.
Slashdot Mirror
True. Using this solution you would need an IP on the dirty box for each machine on the internal network, right?
Ah, but what happens when we start to route packets to the infinite number of other planets out there that need (want) access to our hosts?
Is there possibly an RFC or provisions in the current IPV6 out there for some kind of gateway protocol (translation) for this?
Look how long it's taking IPV6 to be implemented. I think we need to address this NOW.
(check freshmeat) ProFTPd seems to use the same interface that Apache uses to give you multiple domains under one IP which remain seperate from each other
Sorry, this doesn't work. FTP doesn't follow the concept of a host header. If you read the documentation for ProFTPd it states that while it can do hosting for many domains on the same box, each domain must have its own IP address.
I find it absolutely pathetic that the browser microsoft ships with NT 4 makes it impossible to get to their website to download the newest version.
Is this because it's not sending host headers? I know that's why we can't access any of the sites we do vhosting for, but is ms using virtual hosted sites?
We've been looking into implementing a setup like this.
The only thing that keeps us from doing it is that our virtual hosting clients need FTP access to their sites.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see a simple solution for this. HTTP file transfers are not an option for security reasons.
I'd really like to do this. Sit something like an OpenBSD box on the dirty side and run Linux behind it. You could even use something like a Mac or Netware server in that place that are fairly secure.
Any ideas or comments?
Has anyone had any experience with Brian Ward's The Linux Problem Solver?
The description says, "Plenty of books teach installation of Linux. But what to do once it's running and something goes wrong or doesn't function?"
Any comments?
I guess they didn't have distributed.net yet...
What can people do with a workstation that would be
impractical or silly to do with a mainframe? (besides play Pacman...)
What software techniques can take advantage of all those extra cycles
lying around?
Anyone else feeling frustrated because of a strong desire to post a reply to these guys?
I mean, wouldn't you just love to jump into this conversation:
Aucbvax.2628
fa.unix-wizards
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!unix-wizards
Tue Aug 11 11:41:44 1981
Flaming Psychologists
>From mo@LBL-UNIX Tue Aug 11 11:23:32 1981
Well, you see what kind of stuff gets into DATAMATION.
I don't understand these things: many of the criticisms
are right, but the facts are categorically wrong! Unix
could benefit from some "normalizaion" (the Software Tools
benefitted greatly from having been written all at once, not
over the years), but the claim that Unix does not present
a simple set of principles is the most incomprehensible
statement he could have made! That is ALL Unix does,
and that is precisely why he doesn't like it! If he hates
it so much, why doesn't he go get an account on a TOPS-10 system
or since he is at UCSD, a UCSD PASCAL machine?
Well, enough of that. I yield the floor to Lauren.
-Mike
I think this should do you:
;)
Aucbvax.2384
fa.unix-wizards
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!WITTMEYER@USC-ISI
Tue Jul 21 08:47:52 1981
REMOVAL FROM MAILING LISTS
From: WITTMEYER at USC-ISI
WE WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE OUR NAME FORM THE UNIX-WIZARDS
MAILING LIST. THE ACCOUNT NAME TO BE REMOVED FROM THE
LIST IS:
WITTMEYER AT USC-ISI
THANKS
-------
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright© 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.
Geez, stop YELLING!
I really enjoyed reading through NET.cooks. It always amazes me that most of my fellow geeks are great cooks (or at least try to be). This was also evidenced by the the discussion following the grilling /. poll.
Any ideas as to why this phenomenon exists?
Yeah, this is one bit of behavior I wish I could get with Gnome. Is there some way to get something like this to work?
I definately see this as a worthwhile project. Many libraries of inner city schools would benefit from a free cataloguing[sp?] system.
While this seems to make sense, it's not really true.
As part of our client base, we have about 14 school districts and around 40 libraries. Most of these are using pretty advanced library management software (such as Follett or Athena) and not one of them has had to pay for it.
Grants for this kind of thing abound. We have people cold calling them wanting to give them money to put in NT servers and software.
The problem comes in when the grant money is spent and they can't afford to keep the equipment up, or to pay the line and ISP charges for their Internet connection.
I'm not saying it's not a worthwhile project, I just want people to be aware that there probably aren't a whole lot of libraries who would jump on something just because it was free. It's got to be better.
From the USPS page:
You can mail most documents created in Microsoft® Word 6.0 or later, WordPerfect® 6.0 or later, PageMaker® 6.5 or later, VENTURA(TM) 7.0 or later, or QuarkXPress(TM) 3.2 or later.
I didn't exactly mean tax money. I was alluding (too vaguely I guess) to that extra penny you have to shell out for stamps now. The longer you've been around, the more pennies. For me, I remember when it was 20 cents.
And you don't think UPS could charge a little less if they didn't need to spend your money on advertising?
You obviously don't understand. While operating only on UPS/FedEx/etc in a large metro area may be very profitable, you wouldn't be able to afford to send many first class letters delivered to a Rural Route address in the middle of nowhere.
The USPS *must* provide equal services to all citizens of the US. That is why the government is involved. It is their mandate.
I hope I have somehow eased your mind on this issue and let you sleep well tonight.
It's called socialism.
That's exactly what postal money orders are for.
I mean, everyone in the US could get a hotmail account (I know, I know... but...) and not have to pay $0.41 per message. This is where the whole plan breaks down.
Sure, we can set up a hotmail account for everyone, but how are all those without 'net access going to get it? There are TONS of low income/technophobe/elderly folks who won't be able to participate.
This is were your whole argument breaks down.
The last machine I "bought" was an Apple II. I haven't had a PC that I didn't build up from parts. Obviously in this situation, I don't have a Windows license.
I'd say a much larger population of Linux users may have purchased a box with Win3.x installed on it, but have home built since then.
In that case, they'd at least have to buy the upgrade.
The Genetics Age
ANSI/Linux?
Yes, but they don't force the homeowner to research how to operate the lock in the first place... then check every day or so to see if they need to have their locks changed because of a defect in the supplied lock (or the key ;)
I think this is more appropriate.
Another Haiku for Netscape:
you brightened the web
then failed to keep up with it
slip into the night
When you compare new crap to old crap...
This post should be at +5, insightful.
If nothing else, I've got to give moderators a hand for not marking it as a troll.
When we do web sites for clients, our contract stipulates that we will insure support for browsers up to 2 years old. Guess who's about to get axed?
When we discuss the issues with backward compatibility with Netscape, a lot of these guys who are just getting into the 'net don't even recongnize the name. Although we try to counsel them on the small portion of their audience that may still be using it, to them it's not worth the extra effort (read: money) to accomodate them. They need a flashy product out there NOW and they want it to look good on their desktop... IE.