Data Center QoS equipment breaking http 1.1?

up at 3.am up at 3.am
Fri Jul 31 17:05:06 CDT 2009


Please disregard this idiocy of mine...it appears that the Apache 
UseCanonicalName directive selectively breaks some NameVirtualHosts, while 
leaving others unscathed, but turning it off fixed it anyway.

On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, up at 3.am wrote:

>
> Sorry if this is a little OT, but we're seeing a serious problem and was 
> wondering if it is what I think it is.
>
> In short: I have been moving services off of our servers in a data center 
> onto a server at eSecuredata, who rents dedicated servers.  The idea is to 
> lower costs and eliminate having to deal with hardware.
>
> The advertise "unmetered bandwidth", but mention QoS measure to control 
> "bandwidth hogs".
>
> One of my customers, whose site I just moved from a unique IP virtual host on 
> my old server onto an Apache NameVirtualHost on the new one, worked fine at 
> first.  Then today, they started complaining about getting one of our home 
> pages.  I figured DNS or web caching issues, until I started seeing it for 
> myself.  It was no caching issue, it was NameVirtualHost breaking.
>
> I poured over my configs (I've done this config countless times), and saw 
> this in the apache docs:
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/vhosts/name-based.html
>
> " Some operating systems and network equipment implement bandwidth management 
> techniques that cannot differentiate between hosts unless they are on 
> separate IP addresses."
>
> So, I installed lynx on the server, and sure enough, it worked perfectly fine 
> there, just not from anywhere outside eSecuredata's network that I could see.
>
> Can anyone shed any light on this particular practice, of this company in 
> particular?
>
> thanks
>
> James Smallacombe		      PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
> up at 3.am							    http://3.am
> =========================================================================
>

James Smallacombe		      PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
up at 3.am							    http://3.am
=========================================================================




More information about the NANOG mailing list