guideline for name-based web hosting justification

Mike Horwath drechsau at
Wed Sep 13 11:47:11 EDT 2000

On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 08:08:38AM -0700, Jon Rust wrote:
> You're bending the truth here, quite a bit actually. The HTTP 1.0 proto
> may not support the Host: header, but browsers that are using HTTP 1.0
> may very well support he Host: header. Oh, i don't know, a smallish
> browser called Netscape, v 2.0 or better, comes to mind. Grepping
> through my access log for today I see over 65,000 1.0 requests. 98% of
> those are to name-based virtual hosts (which is almost all i run
> anymore), and they all worked.

That is an excellent point.  One that isn't lost upon any of us I
don't think.

But my counter would be: If you have a site doing 1/4 million hits a
day via named virtual hosts, and it takes .01 of a second...that is
2500 seconds of CPU.

Now, match that up with 10 more sites on the same cluster of that
caliber plus add in a couple more thousand sites of varying size.


Mike Horwath           IRC: Drechsau         drechsau at Geeks.ORG
Home: 763-540-6815  1901 Sumter Ave N, Golden Valley, MN  55427
Opinions stated in this message, or any message posted by myself
through my Geeks.ORG address, are mine and mine alone, period.

More information about the ARIN-discuss mailing list