guideline for name-based web hosting justification

> > It's just plain stupid to go around spouting that name based hosting is as
> > easy to accomplish (full scale) as it is to give a dialup user a dynamic
> > IP or have lots of your users use NAT.
> 
> I have to admit, that the metaphor does hold in my view if you are speaking
> in terms of difficulty.  The only difference in difficulty I see is in
> introducing billing mechanisms that are obviously vacant in the case of
> dial access systems.

What about all the other issues people have raised?  QOS, black-holed IPs,
HTTP/1.0 (which seems to be minimal, but from more digging on my own it
could be as high as 5%), real-time web performance monitoring, SSL
(supposedly and exemption, but not stated any where, and from some posts,
not being taken seriously), databases that communicate by IP address
(don't ask me), etc.

BTW, billing mechanisms are not obviously vacant in dial access
systems.  Dial access is loaded with different forms of monitoring and
billing.

Mury