I got 2 domains bought at diferent providers and I would like http://aaaaa.com to show http://bbbbb.com/aaaaa
Is this possible using only DNS? must I transfer the domain to my hosting provider that has the http://bbbb.com domain? I really don't want to use a redirection or iframe.
Thank you for your help!
You can do that on DNS Level in two ways:
Depending on your Provider you can make http://DomainA.com/ redirect with masking to http://DomainB/Folder now this is premature way of doing it specially if SEO matters to you.
If you have your own servers or you can add Virtual Directory on the server you can point DomainA to this server and make http://DomainB/Folder location as start point.
This can be done with Apache, Nginx or IIS.
Please can you give me more explanations on what OS and what kind of hosting you have so i can help you with this? And also what kind of application because if your using .net its a bit different then using normal PHP or HTML or wordpress... U will need to add Virtual Directory to achieve this.
If your using shared hosting and have Apache web-server the easiest way to do it is so:
.htaccess and Apache also can handle such redirection.
http://www.site5.com/blog/apache/htaccess/redirect-to-blog/20090427/
Regards and hope this helps.
Related
I would like to be able to have my login work in development mode (localhost:3000) as well as on the production server, and ideally, on a staging server.
Apparently you can only configure one domain for login, unlike Google apps, which is much smarter.
Maybe I could rig up my hosts file to do something spiffy with a subdomain?
Under Basic Info: App Domains, you can put in your domain. It will handle all subdomains if you just put in the main domain name: '<yourdomain>.com' So it will definitely be able to handle your dev.yourdomain.com, qa.yourdomain.com, staging.yourdomain.com, etc.
As for your local development, that's where it gets tricky. You can't use multiple domains, as you've noted. You can definitely try to follow this answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/7493806/183880 which involves creating a second Facebook app and configuring the domain to localhost.
I'm not sure if anyone else has solved it yet, but I came across the problem where if you are trying to develop Open Graph actions and objects, it's pretty much difficult if not impossible to develop those locally. This is because the Facebook servers need to be able to access the Open Graph object urls. And in this case since you'll be developing locally, they can't access http://localhost:3000/my-object-url. Somehow you need to be able to expose your local environment to the external world. More trouble than it's worth, in my opinon. My only work around is to just deploy to a development server http://dev.yourdomain.com and test from there.
I'm looking at some (PHP) Frameworks, and I just noticed this in the Laravel documentation:
Like most web-development frameworks, Laravel is designed to protect your application code, bundles, and local storage by placing only files that are necessarily public in the web server's DocumentRoot. This prevents some types of server misconfiguration from making your code (including database passwords and other configuration data) accessible through the web server. It's best to be safe.
I'm familiar with CodeIgniter and CakePHP, as far as I know, these two frameworks don't do this. Should you really split it up and place your core logic outside of the webroot? In my experience, most clients use shared hosting and are not able to change their VirtualHost settings.
What kind of misconfiguration could you possibly do that would output your passwords? When developing, should you really do this?
Yes, keeping only those files which should be publicly accessible in DocumentRoot is a best practice for web application security. Consider:
Every file which is private would need a rule configured with the web server to explicitly block it.
Anyone adding files to the project needs to consider web server security settings. Simply keeping the files in separate directories makes it obvious what's public. And developers don't need to change security configurations.
Separating executable code and static files is a good practice anyway.
Not blocking access to PHP scripts can cause unintended consequences. For example, you may have a script to update some DB records when run manually at the command line, so someone simply guessing a script name can run it over the internet.
Monitoring for and cleaning malicious code written to the public directory is much easier if the real application logic is elsewhere. See Wordpress breakins for an example.
CakePHP supports this - see deployment:
CakePHP applications should have the document root set to the
application’s app/webroot. This makes the application and
configuration files inaccessible through a URL.
Iam building a web portal which will be rented to customers on a hosted model (SAAS), where they will be using the entire portal features on their own domains with their own branding.
Now I don't want them to get the files of my web-portal, but still be able to use a custom branded portal.
One solution which someone suggested here was to host the branded version on my server and all it via an Iframe on the customer's domain. However I didn't like the idea very much.
One second approach which I researched and found was to host the portal on a fresh IP in my server and ask the customer to point his domain to that ip.
The webportal will be sold to lot of customers and they all will have separate User Interfaces and brandings, so this is needed.
Please suggest me what do you feel about my approach or if you guys have a better idea in mind please pour in your suggestions.
iFrames are evil.
With that said I would probably go with a subdomain approach. They add a subdomain like webportal.somecompany.com that points to you and have your webserver route them to the correct hosted instance of your application based on subdomain. That way their www.somecompany.com still goes to their website.
We're running a SAAS application that supports branding, and we do it by dynamically serving up CSS. If all of your customers have a unique domain name pointed at your server, you could select your CSS files by domain name: If a customer logs in at "http://portal.customer.com/login", you can have his HTML link to the file "/stylesheets/portal.customer.com.css", and so forth. Alternatively, you can create a subdomain for each of your customers, and point them all at your master server, using very similar code to pick the CSS.
This lets you have a single IP address for all customers (and only as many servers as you need to support all your customers behind that IP address), instead of one IP address / server per customer - should cut save on hosting costs!
(NOTE: I'm leaning toward the subdomain approach, the more I think about it. If you're using HTTPS, it would let you use a single "*.yourdomain.com" certificate, rather than trying to mess with separate certificates for each client domain.)
You don't need to run different IPs for different customers. HTTP 1.1 supports Host: like so
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: example.com
This is how most shared hosts work. When a customer sets up their DNS records to point at your server/load balancer, the incoming requests will have your client's hostname in the headers. Whether you set up virtual hosts in say Apache or do it at the application level is up to you.
Please for your own sake don't do iframes. There's a lot of information on the web on architecture for multi tenant applications.
I made the experience that in such a scenario your customers will come up with any possible web UI requirement you can imagine. Therefore it is rather difficult to build a web UI framework that can accomodate to all the needs, in fact this would rather be a content management system.
Furthemore, for building the web UI, you may meet any combination of customer in-house development, 3rd party web agency or request to get it developed by yourself.
In such situations I made good experiences with offering the SaaS as actual web services allowing custom developed portals to run on top. With this, anybody can build the actual portal with the clients look and feel. You could offer development and hosting as an option.
is it possible (if not then whats the easiest way to) transfer a site created on a local server using zend framework to a hosted server by an isp. Is it even possible to create a site using the zend framework on an isp's server.
It is a very simple task to do - normally paths, database links and a few bits and pieces need to be customised - but not too much work.
Regards,
Matt
I am working on iphone networking application.. I am using asihttp , a wrapper of the CFnetwork framework. http://allseeing-i.com/ASIHTTPRequest/
I want to build a server that sends some data on request from the client... I want this for the sole purpose of testing the application i write and understanding the networking more deeply..
Any help is appreciated
Thank you
Seems like the most straight forward solution is to setup an Apache HTTPD server and just put a static document at the location you want your data to come from.
The two most simple approaches that come to mind:
Enable Web Sharing on your Mac. You can then access the documents in your Sites directory inside your home directory. The Sharing preference pane will tell you the exact URL.
If static content is not enough, write a little Python web server to serve content. Python comes with standard HTTP Server modules. You can get stuff going with like half a dozen of lines of code.