pro/cons of virtual hosting services

  > poole at eunet.ch writes:
  > > 
  > > To repeat: The second soloution proposed provides all aspects of
  > > provider independence.  Why should we waste address space if wasting it
  > > does not provide significant additional functionality? 
  > 
  > Because the customer wants something else (and they pay your wage too
  > in the end).

I contest that the majority wants something different from my 
second soloution.  Please re-read it.

  > Please realize that we are talking about a purely -superficial- difference
  > of ~$3000* for running a seperate server (PC based) vs. a virtual one 
  > (typical production costs for a commercial WWW server are multiple 10'000 
  > of dollars, so we are really talking about noise). Neither solution 
  > conserves address space, but at least the virtual server conserves certain 
  > other (more important?) resources *.

But you can run a virtual server without wasting address space!

  > Naturally the correct solution would be for the HTTP protocol to pass
  > the complete URL to the server, however it's too late for that.

Which I understand is fixed in the newest spec. 

Daniel