pro/cons of virtual hosting services

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

I disagree. Most *paying customers* want http://www.xxx.com/ and will
expect to get it. These people are only buying service on our site
because it make better sense, not because most of them could not afford
a leased line *and* take a whole calss C or more with them.

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

Not at the moment.

>   > 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. 

Isn't.

Daniel,

Please keep away from trying to develop business models for the 'net. That
is the jobs of the companies that pay your wages. You are not there to
decide how applications will work today. Feel free to sit on working
groups and influence future developments, which will make the 'net a
better place, but please do not try to change the way non-RIPE
organisations are already working.

Regards,
-- 
Peter Galbavy                                                 peter at demon.net
@ Demon Internet                                      phone://44/181/371_3700
                                            http://www.wonderland.org/~peter/
                  snail://UK/N3_1TT/London/42_Hendon_Lane/Demon_Internet_Ltd/