On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Eric Covener <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In your example it checks in the virtual hosts matching ip:port in
>> config file order :
>>
>> 1. ServerName www.example.com
>>
>> 2. ServerName gone.example.com
>>
>> 3. ServerName forbidden.example.com
>>    ServerAlias *.example.com
>>
>> The wildcard is last in your example, in mine it is first. Is it as
>> simple as changing the order so more specific non-wildcard servernames
>> match first and the wildcard last ? Bummer :)
>
> I'm not sure about wildcard serverlias in first-listed vhost.  It's
> _already_ the default for anything that doesn't match another
> serveralias or servername, so you may be covering up subsequent
> specific serveraliases with this wildcard serveralias.  Does that
> maybe explain the symptom?

I think so. This is a paradigm shift for people using NameVirtualHost
a.b.c.d and taking advantage of the old "default" per-ip container
for virtualhost patterns matching a.b.c.d. on the same port. The
wildcard in the first container is what is causing the problem for me.

Likewise i think i could simulate multiple "default" sections in
apache 2.4 by having the "default" section i have with the wildcard,
but
with a wildcard serveralias after all the higher priority ServerNames
in that group of vhosts, so that the behavior is similar to the old
2.2 notion of NameVirtualHost.

> I don't think we'll work hard to find a "better" serveralias but I
> have never looked at that part of the resolution.  It would be nice to
> document that final part.

Yes i'd agree that there is no need for a code change, a doco change
would solve the problem.

Once people using NameVirtualHost start moving to 2.4 on masse, it
might pop up more often.

Cheers
Brett

-- 
The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education.

Albert Einstein

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to