I know on some of the earlier versions it would only be allowed to be accessed from the first IP address to hit the server, but don't know if that is still the case now.
I can see the point of development meaning for LOCAL use only. Local use to me mean only on the machine its installed on. If you'r wanting it accessible from any machine in your network or a few machines in your network, then its not a LOCAL development purpose then. The access as I see it is for the Localhost domain which is usually configured to 127.0.0.1. " This wouldn't make it any more likely to be used unlicensed - would it?" Ofcourse it would. If you could access the application anywhere in the network, what would stop someone or a business developing an intranet application and using the dev version to run it? This is what the Pro version is for. If the dev version was anything more than a dev version, being local access only it would defeat the purpose of it being a dev version. That's my take on it anyway Steve -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Lynch Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 2:59 PM To: CFAussie Mailing List Subject: [cfaussie] CF Development version limitations Hi All, I've just set up a new development environment and practices at a new job I've started working on and come across a limitation of the CF Development version and I'm keen to understand what others have done to avoid it. The setup is as follows - pretty typical development setup with Development Licences of CF on each of them. We are using apache on the machines as the web server to allow simpler management across all the machines. We also have a development server which is a full licensed copy which we use for testing. The problem is that we typically have a 3 of 4 different websites set up on each machine which is nice and easy with apache and using named virtual host we can have them all on the 127.0.0.1 address. The problem is you can't use ssl on virtual named hosts (or on more than 1) so we can only have SSL setup on one of the sites. So question (finally) is: how do people get around this? And for MM - is there a major reason why the Developer restriction couldn't be one IP address and the entire 127.0.0.1 domain? This wouldn't make it any more likely to be used unlicensed - would it? Look forward to any thoughts or ideas, Cheers, Mark -- www.lynchconsulting.com.au --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/ --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
