On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 02:35:39PM -0500, Graham Fawcett wrote:
> Andrew's suggestion looks like a winner: it gives a nice failover in
> case 'Host' is not included in the request header.

One corner case: I'm not sure what happens if a port is specified.  Does
Host: contain "servername:8080"?  Is it OK to include the port in the
SERVER_NAME variable?

> Although I like it, would it violate the 'no-magic' rule? A request that
> needed the failover would definitely violate HTTP/1.1 (?14.23, "A client
> MUST include a Host header field in all HTTP/1.1 request messages");
> perhaps a 400 Bad Request would be more appropriate than a failover.

Not a bad suggestion; might have to check that the HTTP version was in fact
1.1, though.

--amk