I wrote that for a colleague that works with load-balancers.
There's no such thing as a "server name", the HTTP Host is the virtual
host (what comes in the Host: header), one IP address might have many
virtual hosts. Or the address might well be an http proxy serving any
host. Thus HTTP Host.
On the other hand behind a load balancer (or if you have many "A"
records for a dns hostname) you might find requests for the same http
host directed towards several server addresses. That's why I put the
http host as children of the IP address (each server in turn might
serve several virtual hosts).
You are probably right about the order HTTP hosts may be more
interesting to see first.
Yours lazily,
Luis E. G. O.
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 01:01:27 +0100, Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Lego!
>
> Some things I've recognized with "room for improvement" (unless reasons
> I don't see).
>
> You use the terms:
>
> 1.) "HTTP Requests by HTTP Host"
> 2.) "HTTP Requests by Server Address"
>
> IMHO 1.) is a bit odd, better might be ""HTTP Requests by Server Name"
> (true for both Request Tree and Server Tree)
>
> In the Server Tree:
>
> the Requests are divided into address and name, while the Responses
> shows only the addresses, which makes the understanding more difficult
> than it could be.
> the Requests should first show the names branch and then the addresses
> branch, as humans might find it easier to handle names first.
>
> Any reason other than the laziness of the implementor? ;-)
>
> What do you think?
>
> Regards, ULFL
>
--
This information is top security. When you have read it, destroy yourself.
-- Marshall McLuhan
