Nobody is forcing virtual host users to use the new functionality, they can still do path based ProxyPassReverse statements that will assume the virtual host's domain name. However, I think it would be unfortunate to disable this additional functionality to everybody in order to prevent virtual host users from misusing the new functionality.
-bmd On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 01:59:22PM +0200, Manon Goo wrote: > I do not think it is a good idea to be able to configure someting inside a > virtual host that tragets URLs outside it. This is fine in the > "server config" or in a _default_ virtual host but nowhere else. especialy > in enviroments whith many virtual hosts, vhost in diffrent includefiles > edited by different persons. > > Manon > > > --On Dienstag, 30. Juli 2002 13:16 Uhr +0200 Martijn Schoemaker > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > The new config will use the target specified in the > > config file 'as-is' and thus has no further link to > > any virtual host or internal configuration what so- > > ever. > > > > Greets, > > Martijn > > > > Manon Goo wrote: > > > >>> also.. what about virtual hosts.. doesn't requiring them to have a > >>> hostname break them? > > > > Doe the new config allow to target URLs outside of the scope of a virtual > > host directive if > > used within a virual host section ? > > > >> > >> There is no requirement to have a hostname - the old behaviour still > >> holds. > >> > > > > > > -- > > ------ WARNING: This signature contains a VIRUS ! ------- > > - SHLRUIOHUIOWHLNNMSKHKDLWINDOWSJHFHKJLLUIHEKJLNDHKKJHL - > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > > >
