I have 10 websites on an IP. I would like to share the IP among all the websites.How do I achieve this without having to run these websites on different port numbers?
Host headers for IIS.
You use the "name-based virtual hosts" feature of the apache webserver:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/vhosts/
Other webservers may or may not have a similar feature.
Related
I have a debian based home-server running in my home network (port-forwarding is disabled due to security reasons). There are multiple services/web-applications running using docker based deployment. Is it possible to map different ports to subdomains for a hostname running in a home network?
For instance, currently I have configured my modem to provide static IP and hostname to my server and I access services using http://host-name.local:port_number. Is it possible to setup subdomains to access different applications like http://wiki.host-name.local and http://grafana.host-name.local?
Thank you for the ideas. I have gone for a CDN provider, cloudflare.com, to act as a reverse proxy and add additional layer of security for DDoS mitigation. Of course, I have also enabled Multi-factor authentication for all my web applications before exposing them on the external network. Cheers!
I have a little server in my local network that provides several web services. Each service can be accessed by entering the ip of the server followed by the respective port.
Now I always have to remember which service is behind which port and it would be nicer to have specific subdomains forwarded to these ports. For example
ip:1234 -> foo.server.local
ip:4321 -> bar.server.local
How can this be done? I have pihole running on the server and had hoped to get this done using pihole but I was not successful.
What you are looking for is to set up a Domain Name Server (DNS). phoenixnap.com/kb/raspberry-pi-dns-server This guide should help.
You use a domain to direct to an IP:port combo. Like you could direct 123.12.12.12:8080 to some.thing and 123.12.12.12:8081 to any.address.
The domain name is arbitrary and masks the whole IP:port address.
Firstly, this is a great place to learn and share new information.
Now I've an issue with hosting two websites on the same server but before describing my problem, there are some terms that I'll use henceforth to make things easier.
Website Setup
Server OS - CentOS 7 x64, Docker version - 18.03.0-ce, build 0520e24
1st Website: example.com - hosted via Nginx (Runs as a service on the host machine and not via Docker Container) on port 80 (re-directs to 443) : static website with HTML / CSS code.
2nd Website: http://art.example.com:8080/ : served on port 8080 via this Docker Image
SSL - using LetsEncrypt for both the above domains.
Requirements
To serve both sites (and possibly more) via HTTPs without breaking either of them.
This is because when I browse the 2nd website using art.example.com:8080, it works fine but if I browse the 1st website then subsequent requests to 2nd website somehow start going on HTTPs, causing the page to not load.
Questions
Can both sites (and more) be served via port 80|443 via Nginx VHosts (or any other alternative) without using a different port, i.e: 8080 for 2nd website? This is to not have any ports in the URL as mentioned above but just the domain name.
Or, is there a way to forward traffic to the Docker service on a different port while the main main web service listens to port 80|443? What config changes would I need to do?
I've searched on this forum as much possible but couldn't get much.
Please let me know if any more information would be required from me.
Thanks in advance!
Solution: As recommended by this Docker image maintainer - kdelfour as well as a quick recommendation by BretFisher, we can remake the 1st Website as a Docker Container like the 2nd Website and then load-balance them using Traefik as a reverse proxy to manage SSL
Marking this as solved until an even better solution is found, cheers!
The new version of Docker (version 1.10) includes a DNS server to pass alias information from other hosts on the same network. There used to be hosts file entries for resolving linked containers (or containers on the same network). I am wondering if it is possible to use this embedded DNS server on an overlay network? I have looked in the documentation (and in issues) and cannot find information about this.
So the way the new embedded DNS "server" works is that it isn't a formal server. It's just an embedded listener for traffic to 127.0.0.11:53 (udp of course). When docker sees that query traffic on the container's network interface, it steps in with its embedded DNS server and replies with any answers it might have to the query. The documentation has some options you can set to affect how this DNS server behaves, but since it only listens for query traffic on that localhost address, there is no way to expose this to an overlay network in the way that you are thinking. However this seems to be a moving target, and I have seen this question before in IRC, so it may one day be the case that this embedded DNS server at least becomes pluggable, or possibly exposable in the way you would like.
im running windows 7 as host and ubuntu 11.04 as guest.
Which would be the best way to access a webserver on a guest from host via a defined url
(and vise versa)
e.g http://myvirtualbox and http://myhost
For now i have configured a network bridge, but the guest is gets a different ip assigned everytime. A simple solution would be to assign a staic ip and configure a name resolution localy on each machine, but maybe there is an other way (internal netwok perhaps?)
You can modify the hosts file on machines to map the hostname to the IP addresses of the machines (and change their IP addresses to static).
Or another more flexible (more hosts, faster integration for new machines) option: you're going to want to set up a DNS service, configure the machines to work with it, then add the IP of the DNS as a name server in your network adapter for the hosts to use.
That will be a more flexible, maintainable and scalable solution.
From the looks of it though, if you want a 10 minute fix, go for the first option. There are lots of tutorials on it.