On May 11, 2004, at 9:53 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
IMO, we need more control over the port number that Apache determines to be canonical beyond that which is provided by UseCanonicalName, simply because there are so many options and permutations which are possible and applicable for different environments.
Though I suspect that I've missed some discussion here - I can thing of at least 2 cases where a UseCanonicalPort separate from the name would be goodness. Or alternatively some more sublte client-fall-through-filter-and-add/replace-values.
But +1 on not overloading Name further and separate into Port.
Dw
