pro/cons of virtual hosting services

Daniel Karrenberg writes:
 > We recommend to use URLs of the form
 > 
 > 	http://www.www-provider.com/customer1/
 > 	http://www.www-provider.com/customer2/
 > 
 > or if customers desire www.customer.com:
 > 
 > 	http://www.customer1.com/customer1/
 > 	http://www.customer2.com/customer2/
 > 
 > with CNAME RRs for www.customer1.com and www.customer2.com pointing to
 > the real server. The latter variant provides mobility for the customer
 > without using extra address space.

This means that

- people can't start with a WWW hotel and then move the server to their own
host after they have been connected, without trouble of readvertising their
WWW page.  Lots of people start this way, as visibility in WWW is
important, but they don't know enough of Internet to take it in their
everyday business, and are afraid of security issues involved here.  But
usually they will move it, sooner or later.

- it is annoying to search for someone's page if one has to know who is the
WWW provider first.

- most companies seem very reluctant to allow service provider name to be
visible in their name, both for image reasons and the simple fact that it
gives too much control to service provider: The company can't simply switch
the service provider if they aren't pleased with the one they have been
using.

It seems to me to be an overkill to save single IP numbers, in particular
when they are only consumed one per company?

-- 
Heikki Suonsivu, T{ysikuu 10 C 83/02210 Espoo/FINLAND,
hsu at clinet.fi  work +358-0-4375209 fax -4555276 home -8031121