On Tuesday 30 August 2005 04:49 am, Stig Sandbeck Mathisen wrote: > On Aug 30, 2005, at 10:31, Brian May wrote: > > Would it be feasible to have something like "update-alternatives", but > > instead of managing files in the file system, it allocates port > > numbers? > > > > That way every service that listens on port, for example 143, will be > > registered, but only one will be "active" at one time. > > Please bear in mind that a single computer also can have a lot of IP > addresses. For example, I can have apache2 on one address, and squid > reverse proxy on another, both listening on the same port. As I understand Brian's idea, this would just be a way of allowing daemons to cohabitat in their default configuration. The administrator would be free to override the defaults in any way he wanted. Daniel -- /------------------- Daniel Burrows <dburrows@debian.org> ------------------\ | "But what *does* kill me bloody well leaves me dead!" | | -- Terry Pratchett, _Carpe Jugulum_ | \---------------- The Turtle Moves! -- http://www.lspace.org ---------------/
Attachment:
pgp2Hk3igumqK.pgp
Description: PGP signature