Hi,
> A digression. I am not sure of the fit of the analogy of having a web site
> hosted and an emperor having no clothes. The story as I remember it has to
...
> Now, what does this story have to do with Hicomp having their web site
sorry...what I meant was that I've seen ISP's who say "sure, we'll
setup a domain name for you like www.foo.com/foo", without telling
the customer the implications of what they're getting (or not getting!).
The customer sometimes thinks "cool, I have a domain". But they don't quite,
since they really have a domain name registered to them (hopefully!), and
DNS entries equating that name to the ISP's real name (in effect).
In some cases locally, I've seen ISPs try to hide the issue, because that
let them compete with ISPs that had the ability to setup multiple IP addresses
(each with a different domain name) that all came to the same server.
> hosted? I never made any secret of that. Most everybody finds our
> website. My signature, on everyone of my messages, has the complete web
The problem, as we saw, is that people tend to remember URL's of the
form www.foo.com/foo as simply www.foo.com
> address. There are a few advantages to having a website hosted. 1- I do
> not have to worry about firewalls. 2- I do not have to worry about having
...
All of Denys advantages to having someone else host your website still
apply even if the ISP has multiple ISP addresses (and, thereby, provides
your domain an ISP address of it's own).
My goal wasn't to knock Denys' site, but to encourage other users who might
be setting up a web site at an ISP to investigate getting their own IP
address at the ISP, to avoid any problems.
BTW, our site points to Denys' at: http://www.hicomp.com/hicomp/
I've used that link to download the demo version of HiBack.
(Thanks for providing a demo!)
> On the other hand, Stan is correct and I should investigate the business of
> multiple IP addresses.
I'd be interested in knowing if an ISP who offers both setups charges more
for the separate IP address setup.
SS
|
