thanks alot for your help alfred much appreciated.
you were right all lockf's turned to accepts right after
i made that change.....thanks again.
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:04:16 -0700
> From: Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Dan Phoenix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: lockf in apache
>
> At a glance the following config should work. If apache is not in
> 'accept' then you've done something wrong.
>
>
> * Dan Phoenix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010410 15:01] wrote:
> >
> >
> > Ok let's take this for example
> >
> > Listen 172.16.0.26:80
> > Listen 172.16.6.2:80
> >
> > NameVirtualHost 172.16.0.26:80
> > NameVirtualHost 172.16.6.2:80
> >
> > <VirtualHost 172.16.0.26:80 172.16.6.2:80>
> >
> > .6.2 is real ip for load balancer.
> > .0.x is for internal use
> >
> > so let;s rewrite.
> >
> > Bind *
> > Port 80
> >
> > NameVirtualHost 172.16.0.26
> > NameVirtualHost 172.16.6.2
> >
> > <VirtualHost 172.16.6.2>
> >
> >
> > this the idea?
> > not even sure why .0.26 etc was setup tha tis just for internal testing
> > but a good thing to have...maybe a
> > NameVirtual *
> > VirtualHost *
> >
> > not sure if i can get away with that....i will play with it for abit..
> > let me know if you already know off hand.
> > reason we even have namevirtualhost is because we have alot of
> > virtual hosts setup and is required in that case as they all use same ip
> > address.
> >
> >
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
