https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50436
Summary: VirtualHost could behave like people expect it to
Product: Apache httpd-2
Version: 2.3-HEAD
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: Core
AssignedTo: [email protected]
ReportedBy: [email protected]
>From my support experience on #httpd, people do not understand quite well how
name based virtualhosting works.
Most people who haven't read the doc carefully just configure their
virtualhosts as follows :
<VirtualHost www.foo.com>
# no servername
...
</VirtualHost>
<VirtualHost www.bar.com>
# no servername
...
</VirtualHost>
The enhancement I would like to suggest : just let apache works when a config
is set like above. Ie : if VirtualHost is given fqdn as argument(s), and no
ServerName is explicitely set, why not just accept VirtualHost argument(s) as
ServerName (and ServerAliases) ?
I can tell that people not reading much (or not reading at all) the
documentation will finally have vhosts working at first attempt.
Of course, does not mean that the sane way to go (use IPs or * for VirtualHost,
set a ServerName) should not remain supported...
My 2 cents,
Vincent
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
