Very Computer

by **Jame** » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00

I am trying to set up a web server that we can allow employees to
use as department and personal web sites. This is for our intranet
only, nothing to be published on the Internet.
Each Virtual Host has a DNS CNAME pointing at this one machine
(SunOS 4.1.4). Each user has a $HOME/public_html directory. The Web
Host machine has root permissions to those directories.
Setting up Apache 1.3.0 to do the Virtual hosting was pretty
straight forward. That part seems to work. Each virtual site has it's
own content, and is reachable.
The problem is in adding the Frontpage 98 Sever Extentions version
3.0. The installation finishes, but you can not manage any of the
sites with FP98. There are different error messages, depending on how
things were put togeather. I have lost track.
I have tried to use the Apache 1.2.6 and 1.2.5, because the FP98
SERK seems to be complied for 1.2.5. That didn't work either.
Is there a receipe that someone is using that they would like to
share?
I know it can be done. There are several Web Hosting services that
use Apache and the FP98 SERK.
Any help is appreciated. Use the email address here to reply
directly, if you want.
dburwell-at-telecom-dot-com
One of the earlier messages talked about a spelling error in one of
the source files. They had to correct the spelling error, then
re-compile. Can someone point me to the location of the FP98 SERK
source code?
Thanks
Dave

by **Karl Wie** » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00

} I am trying to set up a web server that we can allow employees to
} use as department and personal web sites. This is for our intranet
} only, nothing to be published on the Internet.
} Each Virtual Host has a DNS CNAME pointing at this one machine
} (SunOS 4.1.4). Each user has a $HOME/public_html directory. The Web
} Host machine has root permissions to those directories.
} Setting up Apache 1.3.0 to do the Virtual hosting was pretty
} straight forward. That part seems to work. Each virtual site has it's
} own content, and is reachable.
} The problem is in adding the Frontpage 98 Sever Extentions version
} 3.0. The installation finishes, but you can not manage any of the
} sites with FP98. There are different error messages, depending on how
} things were put togeather. I have lost track.

I'm pretty sure FP98 can't do "name-based VHosts", with the Apache
module and extensions, or with any other webserver. You need distinct
IP addresses, not CNAMEs. Perhaps you can set up bogus internal IPs
( RFC1918 blocks, e.g., network 10.0.0.0/8 ) and route them to your
server. It could then be made to work, but you probably need fake A
and PTR records in your DNS, and so forth.

Quote:} I have tried to use the Apache 1.2.6 and 1.2.5, because the FP98
} SERK seems to be complied for 1.2.5. That didn't work either.
} Is there a receipe that someone is using that they would like to
} share?
} I know it can be done. There are several Web Hosting services that
} use Apache and the FP98 SERK.

I'm pretty sure they all use distinct VirtualHost IP addresses for each
website, though. We sure do. We don't run SunOS on our FrontPage server,
though.

Quote:} One of the earlier messages talked about a spelling error in one of
} the source files. They had to correct the spelling error, then
} re-compile. Can someone point me to the location of the FP98 SERK
} source code?

Only a few snippets of the source were released, in order to forestall
some security concerns ( the attempt wasn't successful ). The full source
of the FP extensions isn't available.

HTH.

--Karl
--

"Order is a form of repetition compulsion" --Freud
"Order is a form of repetition compulsion" --Freud
"Order is a form of repetition compulsion" --Freud

by **Jame** » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00

>} I am trying to set up a web server that we can allow employees to
>} use as department and personal web sites. This is for our intranet
>} only, nothing to be published on the Internet.
>} Each Virtual Host has a DNS CNAME pointing at this one machine
>} (SunOS 4.1.4). Each user has a $HOME/public_html directory. The Web
>} Host machine has root permissions to those directories.
>} Setting up Apache 1.3.0 to do the Virtual hosting was pretty
>} straight forward. That part seems to work. Each virtual site has it's
>} own content, and is reachable.
>} The problem is in adding the Frontpage 98 Sever Extentions version
>} 3.0. The installation finishes, but you can not manage any of the
>} sites with FP98. There are different error messages, depending on how
>} things were put togeather. I have lost track.

>I'm pretty sure FP98 can't do "name-based VHosts", with the Apache
>module and extensions, or with any other webserver. You need distinct
>IP addresses, not CNAMEs. Perhaps you can set up bogus internal IPs
>( RFC1918 blocks, e.g., network 10.0.0.0/8 ) and route them to your
>server. It could then be made to work, but you probably need fake A
>and PTR records in your DNS, and so forth.

I appreciate your reply. I it would be a simple solution to assign
several dozen IP addresses to this machine, then set each IP to a
different web user.
But I believe you are wrong about FP98 supporting virtual hosts based
on CNAME's.
Case in point:
There is a Web Hosting service in the Sacrmento area that advertises
FP98 support. I looked, and this is a sample of what I found:

machine{root}709: nslookup www.goannunciation.org
Server: techserv2.someplace.com
Address: 194.5.207.19

Name: goannunciation.org
Address: 209.60.43.9
Aliases: www.goannunciation.org

machine{root}711: nslookup www.toptonemfg.com
Server: techserv2.someplace.com
Address: 194.5.207.19

Name: toptonemfg.com
Address: 209.60.43.9
Aliases: www.toptonemfg.com

machine{root}712: nslookup 209.60.43.9
Server: techserv2.someplace.com
Address: 194.5.207.19

Name: webtech2.host4u.com
Address: 209.60.43.9

Notice the IP addresses are identical. This machine is running
Apache 1.2.6 with FP 98 server extentions (I don't know the rev). How
do I know? I logged in and mailed the srm.conf and http.conf back to
myself.
If you point your browser at 209.60.43.9, you get a blank html page,
but each of the other URL http:// addresses brings up good pages.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:
>} I have tried to use the Apache 1.2.6 and 1.2.5, because the FP98
>} SERK seems to be complied for 1.2.5. That didn't work either.
>} Is there a receipe that someone is using that they would like to
>} share?
>} I know it can be done. There are several Web Hosting services that
>} use Apache and the FP98 SERK.

>I'm pretty sure they all use distinct VirtualHost IP addresses for each
>website, though. We sure do. We don't run SunOS on our FrontPage server,
>though.

>} One of the earlier messages talked about a spelling error in one of
>} the source files. They had to correct the spelling error, then
>} re-compile. Can someone point me to the location of the FP98 SERK
>} source code?

>Only a few snippets of the source were released, in order to forestall
>some security concerns ( the attempt wasn't successful ). The full source
>of the FP extensions isn't available.

>HTH.

>--Karl

by **Karl Wie** » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00

} >I'm pretty sure FP98 can't do "name-based VHosts", with the Apache
} >module and extensions, or with any other webserver. You need distinct
} >IP addresses, not CNAMEs. Perhaps you can set up bogus internal IPs
} >( RFC1918 blocks, e.g., network 10.0.0.0/8 ) and route them to your
} >server. It could then be made to work, but you probably need fake A
} >and PTR records in your DNS, and so forth.
}
} I appreciate your reply. I it would be a simple solution to assign
} several dozen IP addresses to this machine, then set each IP to a
} different web user.
} But I believe you are wrong about FP98 supporting virtual hosts based
} on CNAME's.
} Case in point:
} There is a Web Hosting service in the Sacrmento area that advertises
} FP98 support. I looked, and this is a sample of what I found:
}
} machine{root}709: nslookup www.goannunciation.org
} Server: techserv2.someplace.com
} Address: 194.5.207.19
}
} Name: goannunciation.org
} Address: 209.60.43.9
} Aliases: www.goannunciation.org
}
} machine{root}711: nslookup www.toptonemfg.com
} Server: techserv2.someplace.com
} Address: 194.5.207.19
}
} Name: toptonemfg.com
} Address: 209.60.43.9
} Aliases: www.toptonemfg.com
}
} machine{root}712: nslookup 209.60.43.9
} Server: techserv2.someplace.com
} Address: 194.5.207.19
}
} Name: webtech2.host4u.com
} Address: 209.60.43.9
}
} Notice the IP addresses are identical. This machine is running
} Apache 1.2.6 with FP 98 server extentions (I don't know the rev). How
} do I know? I logged in and mailed the srm.conf and http.conf back to
} myself.
} If you point your browser at 209.60.43.9, you get a blank html page,
} but each of the other URL http:// addresses brings up good pages.

Hmm, yes, they do seem to be running FP, judging from the banner:

% telnet webtech2.host4u.com 80
Trying 209.60.43.9...
Connected to webtech2.host4u.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTTP/1.0

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 03:03:29 GMT
Server: Apache/1.2.4 FrontPage/3.0.3
Last-Modified: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 14:23:44 GMT
ETag: "153759-2-353cabf0"
Content-Length: 2
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html

.
Connection closed by foreign host.

Even so, I wonder if they're using mod_rewrite ( or maybe even fancier stuff,
like mod_proxy ) to give the FP extensions "what they want"--if you look at
the FP98 installation scripts ( a collection of sick jokes, IMO ) there
don't seem to be any provisions for name-based VHosts. I'm not sure how
much hacking is required--perhaps very little. What I was asserting is
that there wasn't any documented, still less supported, way to do it.
If you find there's a straightforward way, please post how!

--Karl
--

"Order is a form of repetition compulsion" --Freud
"Order is a form of repetition compulsion" --Freud
"Order is a form of repetition compulsion" --Freud

by **Jame** » Thu, 06 Aug 1998 04:00:00

I have Apache serving different Host names without assigning
different IP addresses to each host.

Lets assume you have a machine called joe.a-domain.com with an IP
address of Main_Machine_IP_Address (some standard IP address like
194.5.230.110). You have your master DNS server set with
joe.a-domain.com, with CNAME's for web1 & web2 that "point" to
joe.a-domain.com.

My httpd.conf file is standard, except for these areas:

BindAddress Main_Machine_IP_Address

# ServerName No_IP_Address_Required
NameVirtualHost Main_Machine_IP_Address (IP Address)

<VirtualHost Main_Machine_IP_Address> (No Names on this line)
ServerAdmin webmaster_EMail_address
DocumentRoot /usr/local/apache/share/web1/public_html
ServerName web1.a-domain.com
ErrorLog share/web1/public_html/web1-error_log
TransferLog share/web1/public_html/web1-access_log
ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ share/web1/cgi-bin/
ScriptAlias /cgi-sys/ share/cgi-bin/
ScriptAlias /cgi-local/ share/web1/www_logs/
</VirtualHost>

<VirtualHost Main_Machine_IP_Address>
ServerAdmin webmaster_EMail_address
DocumentRoot /usr/local/apache/share/web2/public_html
ServerName web2.a-domain.com
ErrorLog share/web2/public_html/web2-error_log
TransferLog share/web2/public_html/web2-access_log
ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ share/web2/cgi-bin/
ScriptAlias /cgi-sys/ share/cgi-bin/
ScriptAlias /cgi-local/ share/web2/www_logs/
</VirtualHost>

And so on
If you point a browser at the joe.a-domain.com, you get the pages
for web1.a-domain.com.

I am still playing with this. And I haven't done anything too fancy.
Most of it came from the www.apache.org pages. If you look for Name
Based Virtual Hosts, not IP Based, you will find a lot of this.

I haven't tried to add the FP98 SERK to this setup yet. But that is
next. I suspect you will be proven corrent about a lack of support in
FP98 for V-Hosts, and this will fail. I don't think IIS (The MS Web
Server) supports Named Based V-Hosts. And since the FP98 SERK was
originally intended for IIS, the SERK will suck air with it tries to
deal with these V-Hosts.

>} >I'm pretty sure FP98 can't do "name-based VHosts", with the Apache
>} >module and extensions, or with any other webserver. You need distinct
>} >IP addresses, not CNAMEs. Perhaps you can set up bogus internal IPs
>} >( RFC1918 blocks, e.g., network 10.0.0.0/8 ) and route them to your
>} >server. It could then be made to work, but you probably need fake A
>} >and PTR records in your DNS, and so forth.
>}
>} I appreciate your reply. I it would be a simple solution to assign
>} several dozen IP addresses to this machine, then set each IP to a
>} different web user.
>} But I believe you are wrong about FP98 supporting virtual hosts based
>} on CNAME's.
>} Case in point:
>} There is a Web Hosting service in the Sacrmento area that advertises
>} FP98 support. I looked, and this is a sample of what I found:
>}
>} machine{root}709: nslookup www.goannunciation.org
>} Server: techserv2.someplace.com
>} Address: 194.5.207.19
>}
>} Name: goannunciation.org
>} Address: 209.60.43.9
>} Aliases: www.goannunciation.org
>}
>} machine{root}711: nslookup www.toptonemfg.com
>} Server: techserv2.someplace.com
>} Address: 194.5.207.19
>}
>} Name: toptonemfg.com
>} Address: 209.60.43.9
>} Aliases: www.toptonemfg.com
>}
>} machine{root}712: nslookup 209.60.43.9
>} Server: techserv2.someplace.com
>} Address: 194.5.207.19
>}
>} Name: webtech2.host4u.com
>} Address: 209.60.43.9
>}
>} Notice the IP addresses are identical. This machine is running
>} Apache 1.2.6 with FP 98 server extentions (I don't know the rev). How
>} do I know? I logged in and mailed the srm.conf and http.conf back to
>} myself.
>} If you point your browser at 209.60.43.9, you get a blank html page,
>} but each of the other URL http:// addresses brings up good pages.

>Hmm, yes, they do seem to be running FP, judging from the banner:

>% telnet webtech2.host4u.com 80
>Trying 209.60.43.9...
>Connected to webtech2.host4u.com.
>Escape character is '^]'.
>GET / HTTP/1.0

>HTTP/1.1 200 OK
>Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 03:03:29 GMT
>Server: Apache/1.2.4 FrontPage/3.0.3
>Last-Modified: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 14:23:44 GMT
>ETag: "153759-2-353cabf0"
>Content-Length: 2
>Accept-Ranges: bytes
>Connection: close
>Content-Type: text/html

>.
>Connection closed by foreign host.

>Even so, I wonder if they're using mod_rewrite ( or maybe even fancier stuff,
>like mod_proxy ) to give the FP extensions "what they want"--if you look at
>the FP98 installation scripts ( a collection of sick jokes, IMO ) there
>don't seem to be any provisions for name-based VHosts. I'm not sure how
>much hacking is required--perhaps very little. What I was asserting is
>that there wasn't any documented, still less supported, way to do it.
>If you find there's a straightforward way, please post how!

>--Karl

by **Miles O'Nea** » Mon, 10 Aug 1998 04:00:00

> I am trying to set up a web server that we can allow employees to
> use as department and personal web sites. This is for our intranet
> only, nothing to be published on the Internet.
...
> The problem is in adding the Frontpage 98 Sever Extentions version
> 3.0. The installation finishes, but you can not manage any of the
> sites with FP98. There are different error messages, depending on how
> things were put togeather. I have lost track.

Aye, there's the problem - FP with UNIX.

We ran FP for a while. One problem we had was that FP kept screweing
up the ownership and permissions of teh files it managed. I don't
recall exactly what it wanted, but it would (effectively randomly)
set some of them wrong when it was used. We were *constantly* having
to manually run a job to set the owner, group and permissions back
to what FP needed. We were going to set up cron job to run every
15 minutes, but about that time FP cratered bigtime. We spent several
days digging into the problem, searching everything on teh MS site and
the whole net, and never resolved the problem. We finally gave up,
yanked FP out out, and just use Navigator's publishing mode. Since the
FP file locking for editing never worked right, we had to manually
coordinate anything, so we never saw any real benefit to FP.

This was on FreeBSD (using the BSDI binaries). We had a lot of
problems that seem to be a result of a mediocre port of a product
that was designed to run only on Windows, not UNIX.

We never did get virtual servers to work with FP. We gave up and
ran two separate servers on the same system.

IOW, we were not impressed. We gave it more than a fair shake, and
it did nothing but bite us. (We also tried FP on Solaris and HP/UX,
with no better luck).

-Miles

Very Computer

Apache 1.3.0 - Virtual Hosts and Frontpage SERK

Apache 1.3.0 - Virtual Hosts and Frontpage SERK

Apache 1.3.0 - Virtual Hosts and Frontpage SERK

Apache 1.3.0 - Virtual Hosts and Frontpage SERK

Apache 1.3.0 - Virtual Hosts and Frontpage SERK

Apache 1.3.0 - Virtual Hosts and Frontpage SERK

Apache 1.3.0 - Virtual Hosts and Frontpage SERK