> > I'd even go so far as depreciate the Port directive in favor of a more
> > decorated ServerName directive (joespages.org:80) where port 80 is
> > assumed.
>
> If we don't really need Port ('cause we don't need a port number in
> addition to what is specified on the Listen statement), then I'm all
> for dropping Port. But if we need the functionality of Port I'd
> rather see it remain as-is than overload ServerName like that.
Port is used to tell the server what Port to report it is on, regardless
of what port it is actually on. We must retain the feature of Port,
although it could be done with the ServerName directive.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
