If your clients get domains, buy service by domain, dont care about it
at all, go for it.
You can chroot ftp/dav..etc, then they wont even know it.
El mar, 16-09-2003 a las 13:34, Rod Rodolico escribió:
> Long time ago, I ran a dozen domains or so off one IP. Then, did a colo with a lot
> of IP
On Tuesday, September 16, 2003, at 11:34 AM, Rod Rodolico wrote:
Long time ago, I ran a dozen domains or so off one IP. Then, did a
colo with a lot of IP's and
have each domain running on its own.
Now I have a chance to decrease my colo costs significantly, but only
8 IP's come with the
service
On Tuesday 16 September 2003 19:34, Rod Rodolico wrote:
> I can not think of any drawbacks to doing it. I only offer web, ftp and
> mail service (apache, proftp and exim). The only thing I can think of is
> that reverse dns will not work correctly, but I see no reason that should
> impact these ser
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 05:17:26PM +0100, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 16:23, Alexander Reelsen wrote:
> > is smtp auth at the ldap server.
> >
> > Can anyone tell whether this is actually possible with cram-md5 and not
> > only plain/login?
> If you want aut
On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 16:23, Alexander Reelsen wrote:
> is smtp auth at the ldap server.
>
> Can anyone tell whether this is actually possible with cram-md5 and not
> only plain/login?
If you want authenticated smtp traffic, you probably should use
encrypted smtp traffic too. And then, I don't r
Le Mercredi 19 Février 2003 11:23, Alexander Reelsen a écrit :
> Hi
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 10:56:51AM -0400, Jean-Marc Pédron wrote:
> > Le Mercredi 19 Février 2003 05:08, Alexander Reelsen a écrit :
> > > Any hints, URLS or tools are welcome. Any comments and experience
> > > reports are very
Hi
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 10:56:51AM -0400, Jean-Marc Pédron wrote:
> Le Mercredi 19 Février 2003 05:08, Alexander Reelsen a écrit :
> > Any hints, URLS or tools are welcome. Any comments and experience reports
> > are very welcome :)
> You can have a look at:
> http://www.xams.org/
> http://www.
Hi,
Le Mercredi 19 Février 2003 05:08, Alexander Reelsen a écrit :
> Hi folks
>
[snip]
> I'm completely independent in the backend choice, but I think it will
> scale down to either LDAP, mysql or pgsql. Anyone can give some hints what
> backend has which advantages and disadvantages? There will b
Hi,
cpanel & confixxx - paid
www.ispman.org - free
Regards,
BIVOL
- Original Message -
From: "Alexander Reelsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 11:08 AM
Subject: Virtual hosting solutions
> Hi folks
>
> I'm currently in the need of a complet
Hello List,
> I'm currently in the need of a complete virtual hosting solution.
Confixx could do the Job. The only Service it does not have is imap.
The mailuser it creates don't have a shell, so they have no space to store
the folders.
> I'm completely independent in the backend choice, but I t
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 04:26, Christopher Curtis wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-03-26 at 11:08, Russell Coker wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 15:49, Michal Novotny wrote:
> > > There is a little problem with about 1500 domains/clients.
> > > How can I set it up (with perl/php/ssi/ssl/cgi/ftp/mysql etc.) ?
> >
On Tue, 2002-03-26 at 11:08, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 15:49, Michal Novotny wrote:
>
> > There is a little problem with about 1500 domains/clients.
> > How can I set it up (with perl/php/ssi/ssl/cgi/ftp/mysql etc.) ?
> > I think it have to be all in the chrooted directory, so w
Why not look into something like plesk? I've been looking at buying
this for a long time, and it's a very nice program.
http://www.plesk.com
--
Matt Andreko
-Original Message-
From: Michal Novotny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 9:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 17:34, Julien.Soula wrote:
> Russell Coker writes:
> > On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 15:49, Michal Novotny wrote:
> >[.]
> >
> > > apache/perl/mysql/libs for each domain? or could it be symlinked?
> >
> > Symlinks do not work across chroot jails by definition
Russell Coker writes:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 15:49, Michal Novotny wrote:
> [.]
> > apache/perl/mysql/libs for each domain? or could it be symlinked?
>
> Symlinks do not work across chroot jails by definition.
Whereas <> should work !!!
-- Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRI
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 15:49, Michal Novotny wrote:
> It is possible to make virtual web hosting (apache) in chroot jail?
Yes. Just install complete copies of Debian in the chroot jails.
> There is a little problem with about 1500 domains/clients.
> How can I set it up (with perl/php/ssi/ssl/cgi/f
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 11:01:08PM -0800, Matthew Walkup wrote:
> Hello,
Hi !
> should be treated as seperate accounts. AND the account logins should
> BOTH be just 'webmaster', and the pop server should be able to figure
> out which user it is by the server-name they are using ie
On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 02:21:22AM -0800, Matthew Walkup wrote:
> their logins. but i dont want to use the linux auth for pop/imap/mta. Im
> expecting to have several hundred email addresses with only a few (10-20)
> for ssh. Id rather not fill my passwd file with junk. Is this possible? =)
If
On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 02:21:22AM -0800, Matthew Walkup wrote:
> their logins. but i dont want to use the linux auth for pop/imap/mta. Im
> expecting to have several hundred email addresses with only a few (10-20)
> for ssh. Id rather not fill my passwd file with junk. Is this possible? =)
I
Thanks everyone for the input, was very helpful...
That was my first post, and im very impressed ;)... Thanks guys for all the
tips.
-Matt
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 11:07, Jeremy Lunn wrote:
> > should be treated as seperate accounts. AND the account logins should
> > BOTH be just 'webmaster', and the pop server should be able to figure out
> > which user it is by the server-name they are using ie 'mail.client1.com'
> > or
>
> That is not
Thanks everyone for the input, was very helpful...
That was my first post, and im very impressed ;)... Thanks guys for all the
tips.
-Matt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Walkup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 5:21 AM
Subject: RE: Virtual Hosting for Email
> Thanks for the replies Jeremy...
>
> Well thats what I was looking for, and I figured that about the POP3 (kind
>
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 11:07, Jeremy Lunn wrote:
> > should be treated as seperate accounts. AND the account logins should
> > BOTH be just 'webmaster', and the pop server should be able to figure out
> > which user it is by the server-name they are using ie 'mail.client1.com'
> > or
>
> That is not
> 1) Im wondering if this is possible, or what is the next-best solution.
No. nor POP nor IMAP support HTTP 'Host: ' like constructions
Next best thing: let your users login as [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ...
Frank
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Walkup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 5:21 AM
Subject: RE: Virtual Hosting for Email
> Thanks for the replies Jeremy...
>
> Well thats what I was looking for, and I figured that a
> 1) Im wondering if this is possible, or what is the next-best solution.
No. nor POP nor IMAP support HTTP 'Host: ' like constructions
Next best thing: let your users login as [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ...
Frank
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 11:01:08PM -0800, Matthew Walkup wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]and
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> should be treated as seperate accounts. AND the account logins should BOTH
> be just 'webmaster', and the pop server should be able to figure out which
> user it is by the server-nam
--disabled-password and
authenticate with a htpasswd file).
Thanks again for any more insight,
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Lunn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 2:07 AM
To: Matthew Walkup
Cc: debian-isp@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Virtual Hosting for
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 11:01:08PM -0800, Matthew Walkup wrote:
> a small client base now, so I think it should be alright). So I need a
> smtp/pop package that is light-weight, and doesnt have much overhead. The
Postfix is a great MTA (Mail Transfer Agent). I don't know hich pop
package would
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 11:01:08PM -0800, Matthew Walkup wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]and
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> should be treated as seperate accounts. AND the account logins should BOTH
> be just 'webmaster', and the pop server should be able to figure out which
> user it is by the server-na
--disabled-password and
authenticate with a htpasswd file).
Thanks again for any more insight,
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Lunn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 2:07 AM
To: Matthew Walkup
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Virtual Hosting for Email
On
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 11:01:08PM -0800, Matthew Walkup wrote:
> a small client base now, so I think it should be alright). So I need a
> smtp/pop package that is light-weight, and doesnt have much overhead. The
Postfix is a great MTA (Mail Transfer Agent). I don't know hich pop
package would
Gavin Hamill wrote:
> This is my biggest problem and a significant security hole :/
>
> I have a directory /www containing all the vhosting directories, named
> domain.com, etc.
>
> the entire directory tree is owned by a user called virtual, and
> everyone has CGI, PHP and SSI access.
>
> In t
Gavin Hamill wrote:
> This is my biggest problem and a significant security hole :/
>
> I have a directory /www containing all the vhosting directories, named
> domain.com, etc.
>
> the entire directory tree is owned by a user called virtual, and
> everyone has CGI, PHP and SSI access.
>
> In
On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 06:44:02PM -0500, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
>
> MpP> For simple masshosting I still suggest mod_vhost.
>
> Which brings me back to my original question. For simple masshosting, I
> would agree. But what about a system where some vhosts have CGI or SSI
> access for exam
On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 06:44:02PM -0500, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
>
> MpP> For simple masshosting I still suggest mod_vhost.
>
> Which brings me back to my original question. For simple masshosting, I
> would agree. But what about a system where some vhosts have CGI or SSI
> access for exa
OK, I'll write a patch... you'' get it within an hour or so..
regards,
--
Martin 'pisi' Paljak / freelancer consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / pisi.pisitek.com
www.pisitek.com
On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, Martin 'pisi' Paljak wrote:
> As of 1.3.22 it reads everything .file and file~ :( Easy to fix but ain
As of 1.3.22 it reads everything .file and file~ :( Easy to fix but aint
got no time nor interest.
--
Martin 'pisi' Paljak / freelancer consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / pisi.pisitek.com
www.pisitek.com
On 24 Nov 2001, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> > "Frank" == Frank Louwers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
OK, I'll write a patch... you'' get it within an hour or so..
regards,
--
Martin 'pisi' Paljak / freelancer consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / pisi.pisitek.com
www.pisitek.com
On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, Martin 'pisi' Paljak wrote:
> As of 1.3.22 it reads everything .file and file~ :( Easy to fix but ai
As of 1.3.22 it reads everything .file and file~ :( Easy to fix but aint
got no time nor interest.
--
Martin 'pisi' Paljak / freelancer consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / pisi.pisitek.com
www.pisitek.com
On 24 Nov 2001, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> > "Frank" == Frank Louwers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "Frank" == Frank Louwers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Frank> On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 12:30:41AM +0200, Martin 'pisi' Paljak wrote:
>> Actually there is a very nice and nifty feature in apache 1.3.19+ (or was
>> it 20+) that allows an include filename to be a directory what will
Actually there is a very nice and nifty feature in apache 1.3.19+ (or was
it 20+) that allows an include filename to be a directory what will
include all directories and subdirs of the named direcotry, and load all
files in those dirs as config files. With some maintenance scripts it
allows very e
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 12:30:41AM +0200, Martin 'pisi' Paljak wrote:
> Actually there is a very nice and nifty feature in apache 1.3.19+ (or was
> it 20+) that allows an include filename to be a directory what will
> include all directories and subdirs of the named direcotry, and load all
> files
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 12:30:41AM +0200, Martin 'pisi' Paljak wrote:
> Actually there is a very nice and nifty feature in apache 1.3.19+ (or was
> it 20+) that allows an include filename to be a directory what will
> include all directories and subdirs of the named direcotry,
> and load all fil
> "Frank" == Frank Louwers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Frank> On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 12:30:41AM +0200, Martin 'pisi' Paljak wrote:
>> Actually there is a very nice and nifty feature in apache 1.3.19+ (or was
>> it 20+) that allows an include filename to be a directory what will
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 12:30:41AM +0200, Martin 'pisi' Paljak wrote:
> Actually there is a very nice and nifty feature in apache 1.3.19+ (or was
> it 20+) that allows an include filename to be a directory what will
> include all directories and subdirs of the named direcotry, and load all
> files
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 12:30:41AM +0200, Martin 'pisi' Paljak wrote:
> Actually there is a very nice and nifty feature in apache 1.3.19+ (or was
> it 20+) that allows an include filename to be a directory what will
> include all directories and subdirs of the named direcotry,
> and load all file
Actually there is a very nice and nifty feature in apache 1.3.19+ (or was
it 20+) that allows an include filename to be a directory what will
include all directories and subdirs of the named direcotry, and load all
files in those dirs as config files. With some maintenance scripts it
allows very ea
On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 04:29:06PM -0500, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> And I was thinking just have a separate vhost.conf file and modifying
> that, then restarting apache with graceful.
This is exactly what I do, with the same filename vhost.conf and
everything =)
In fact
> > You can't do name based virtual hosting with ftp, as the protocol
> > doesn't use domain names.
> >
> > You will need to do IP based virtual hosting and use IP aliasing.
>
> How hard would it be to implement a thing in say ProFTPd for example,
> that took "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" as the actual user
hello,
as sombody allready pointed name based virtual hosts are not under the ftp protocol
and for instance you have to chroot every user/domain on its own directory.
alternatively maybe this package could help you:
proftpd-ldap
Versatile, virtual-hosting FTP daemon (with LDAP s
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 07:44:22PM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
>
> Now if you are talking about real virtual hosting where you could have
> multiple users with the same name, then you'd need to have separate
> authentication (passwd) files for each virtual host -- and -- you'd need
> to decide o
> How hard would it be to implement a thing in say ProFTPd for example,
> that took "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" as the actual username, rather than just
> "user" ?
Not needed unless for some reason you have multiple users with the same
username.
Simply by having the username, ftpd will point that user
Original message:
> > How do you use Proftpd to serve more then one domain?
> > Name based Virtual Hosting seems to work only for
> > Apache, because of the protocol (HTTP 1.1).
> >
> > Is the only way to use IP-Aliasing?
> > (Have all IP's to be official?)
Waldemar,
You do not need to have a se
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:36:07AM +1000, David Stanaway wrote:
> On Thursday, July 26, 2001, at 10:17 AM, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
>
> You can't do name based virtual hosting with ftp, as the protocol
> doesn't use domain names.
>
> You will need to do IP based virtual hosting and use IP a
On Thursday, July 26, 2001, at 10:17 AM, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
Hello *,
I have a question:
How do you use Proftpd to serve more then one domain?
Name based Virtual Hosting seems to work only for
Apache, because of the protocol (HTTP 1.1).
You can't do name based virtual hosting with ftp, a
The FTP protocal doesn't handle name based virtual hosting. The only way
to do it is by adding more ips the ftp box. Its a complete pain, but the
only way.
eg isp2.com 10.10.1.1
isp3.com 10.10.1.2
Stuff goes here
Stuff goes here
Hope that helps
> Hello *,
>
> I have a question:
> Ho
> I have a question:
Many do.
> How do you use Proftpd to serve more then one domain?
> Name based Virtual Hosting seems to work only for
> Apache, because of the protocol (HTTP 1.1).
Setup each domain as a user on the system, eg /home/user. (keep the name
simple) Point each Apache Virtual Ho
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 02:58, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > I would be interested in the motivations and arguments anyone on the
> > list has to contradict my opinion. I'm sure it looks like I'm trying
> > to start a flame war, but I just cannot understand why anyone would
> > wish to log to a database.
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 01:25:50PM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> Do you find it difficult to manage your text file database when you
> have programs on different machines needing access to the data?
nope, not at all.
most of the servers i build are fairly self-contained. i don't need to
query
d as products like
Zeus and thttpd seem to be superior to Apache in that arena, and probably
will continue to be.
- jsw
-Original Message-
From: Craig Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 5:05 PM
To: Haim Dimermanas
Cc: Russell Coker; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 10:00:57AM -0500, Haim Dimermanas wrote:
> > any script i need to write can just open the virtual-hosts.conf file
> > and parse it (it's a single line, colon-delimited format) to find
> > out everything it needs to know about every virtual host.
>
> I used to do it that wa
> The problem with that comes when you have multiple web server machines.
>
> I set things up with logging to a single file. Then for multiple machines
> it's easy to use ssh to get the logs from each machine and merge them into a
> single log file.
Again, take a look at mod_spread for Apache
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 17:00, Haim Dimermanas wrote:
> My research showed that web hosting customers don't look at their stats
> every day. Even if they did, your stats are generated daily. Having the
> logs in a database allows you to generate the stats on the fly. Now with a
> simple caching syste
> > Why not use vhost_alias_module in Apache and something like the
> > following: VirtualDocumentRoot /home/www/%-1/%-2/%-3/%-4+
>
> because that's not as flexible as my system. it's fine if you want
> all your vhosts exactly the same, but it doesn't allow for individual
> variation.
Absolute
On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 01:20:16PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> Why not use vhost_alias_module in Apache and something like the
> following: VirtualDocumentRoot /home/www/%-1/%-2/%-3/%-4+
because that's not as flexible as my system. it's fine if you want
all your vhosts exactly the same, but it
> > Now imagine that the guy wants his website accessible via
> > http://example.com as well. The URL only has 2 parts. Apache will look for
> > the files in /home/www/com/example/_/_/(notice the 2 "_" this time) when
> > example.com is requested.
> >
> > Any solution?
>
> Enable sym-links in Apa
On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 01:20:16PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> Why not use vhost_alias_module in Apache and something like the
> following: VirtualDocumentRoot /home/www/%-1/%-2/%-3/%-4+
because that's not as flexible as my system. it's fine if you want
all your vhosts exactly the same, but it
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 19:39, Haim Dimermanas wrote:
> > Why not use vhost_alias_module in Apache and something like the
> > following: VirtualDocumentRoot /home/www/%-1/%-2/%-3/%-4+
>
> I have one large problem with this solution and I have been working on it
> for days without being able to solve it
> > Now imagine that the guy wants his website accessible via
> > http://example.com as well. The URL only has 2 parts. Apache will look for
> > the files in /home/www/com/example/_/_/(notice the 2 "_" this time) when
> > example.com is requested.
> >
> > Any solution?
>
> Enable sym-links in Ap
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 19:39, Haim Dimermanas wrote:
> > Why not use vhost_alias_module in Apache and something like the
> > following: VirtualDocumentRoot /home/www/%-1/%-2/%-3/%-4+
>
> I have one large problem with this solution and I have been working on it
> for days without being able to solve i
> Why not use vhost_alias_module in Apache and something like the following:
> VirtualDocumentRoot /home/www/%-1/%-2/%-3/%-4+
I have one large problem with this solution and I have been working on it
for days without being able to solve it.
What do you do if your customer have a URL that has les
> Why not use vhost_alias_module in Apache and something like the following:
> VirtualDocumentRoot /home/www/%-1/%-2/%-3/%-4+
I have one large problem with this solution and I have been working on it
for days without being able to solve it.
What do you do if your customer have a URL that has le
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 05:29, Craig Sanders wrote:
> whatever policy you decide on for your system, make it consistent...that
> will allow you to automate just about every aspect of creating or
> maintaining virtual hosts. e.g. because all vhosts are set up according
> to my policy, i only have to edi
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 05:29, Craig Sanders wrote:
> whatever policy you decide on for your system, make it consistent...that
> will allow you to automate just about every aspect of creating or
> maintaining virtual hosts. e.g. because all vhosts are set up according
> to my policy, i only have to ed
76 matches
Mail list logo
