[buug] two urls one ip...with ssl

Brian Dessent brian at dessent.net
Fri Sep 3 02:20:39 PDT 2004

John de la Garza wrote:
> actually they are know as well known ports for those services
> I don't know what you experience is with this, so forgive me if I over
> simplify.

Oh, condescending mode. Goodie.

You see there are these things called URLs which Uniformly Locate
Resouces.  One of the fields they contain is the port on the server. 
Inside web pages we have tags called anchors which create links using
URLs.  So you could have links on your main example.com page as follows:

<a href="http://example.com:1080/main_page">Click here for my very
important site</a>


<a href="https://example.com:1234/secure_site">Click here to enter my
secure area!</a>

The port is usually selected from the list of well-known ports out of
custom but there is no requirement for this whatsoever.

> When you put http in a browser it defaults to port 80
> https goes to 443
> if you run a website and want the user to put the domain name alone as
> the url
> you must run your http external listening things on port 80
> and https on 443

Yes, that is true of your initial URL.  However, there's nothing that
says you cannot have an arbitrarily complex link on your main pages for
the "click here to add to shopping cart" or "click here to check-out
securely."  Banks and check-out scripts do this all the time, and users
are perfectly used to it.  Go do some online banking and come back and
let me know if /anything/ but the initial home site url is simple and
easy to comprehend by a human.

> I didn't mean to say management requires it...
> Everyone expects it it is default behavior.  I have not decided this.

You have also not read RFC1738 recently, apparently.


More information about the buug mailing list