Search Results

Search found 24978 results on 1000 pages for 'publishing site'.

Page 159/1000 | < Previous Page | 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166  | Next Page >

  • A-2-Z web hosting on Amazon AWS

    - by JDelage
    All, I am studying web dvp, and one of my classes is project-based. We have to build a functional site that demonstrate our understanding of: HTML, CSS, Javascript, php, MySQL, And potentially Ajax or some other web component. For the project, we can use a local server using WampServer and basically build the site entirely on our laptop. If I have time, I would like to create a real site, and I thought it would be a good way to familiarize myself with Amazon's AWS services. So if I purchase a domain name, can I rely on AWS to host the site from A-to-Z? I understand I can use AWS to host content, the database, and do the background computations, if needed. What else do I need and what are the parts that AWS cannot help me with? Second, is there good documentation for a beginner to navigate AWS and learn how to use it (either on Amazon, or some 3rd party sites, or even a good book, as long as is up to date). The ideal documentation would be a tutorial on creating a web site from a-to-z on AWS, as detailed as possible. As you can guess, I have limited understanding of the IT issues. I have 0 Linux or sysadmin experience, but this is a good opportunity to change that. I hope you can help me. Thank you, JDelage PS: Please keep the answers AWS-specific. At this point, I am only interested in alternative services to the extent that they plug a hole in Amazon's offering.

    Read the article

  • Biggest mistake you've ever made

    - by Rogue Coder
    Similar to the question I read on Server Fault, what is the biggest mistake you've ever made in an IT related position. Some examples from friends: I needed to do some work on a production site so I decided to copy over the live database to the beta site. Pretty standard, but when I went to the beta site it was still pulling out-of-date info. OOPS! I had copied the beta database over to the live site! Thank god for backups. And for me, I created a form for an event that was to be held during a specific time range. Participants would fill out the form for a chance to win, and we would send the event organizers a CSV from the database. I went into the database, and found ONLY 1 ENTRY, MINE. Upon investigating, it appears as though I forgot an auto increment key, and because of the server setup there was no way to recover the lost data. I am aware this question is similar to ones on Stack Overflow but the ones I found seemed to receive generic answers instead of actual stories :) What is the biggest coding error/mistake ever…

    Read the article

  • Google results show .info domain instead of .com

    - by user481913
    I am on shared hosting currently and i registered this account with a .info domain as the main domain.... say MyDomain.info . However, the site runs from MyDomain.com . This is a cpanel based shared hosting account. MyDomain.info has nothing hosted at all... i.e no content files... MyDomain.com is setup as an Add On Domain and run from /public_html/MyDomain under MyDomain.info The problem is that when i type MyDomain as the keyword for search in Google , it shows result(s)for Mydomain.info although this is not the intended site and has no content hosted on itself. I tried to solve the issue by issuing a 301 permanent redirect from MyDomain.info to MyDomain.com, however Google keeps on displaying results as mydomain.info as the main site even after 1 month of the redirect. I want google to index MyDomain.com as the main site and remove MyDomain.info from the results. Also is this harmful from the seo point of view? How can i improve the seo if it is?

    Read the article

  • Apache ProxyPass/ProxyPassReverse to IIS

    - by Dana
    We have an ASP.NET web application which is mapped to a folder on an apache hosted php site using ProxyPass.ProxyPassReverse. A couple of problems being encountered. cookies are being lost which breaks the site navigation, this can be overcome by setting the asp app as cookieless. Forms authentication is used on the ASP site, this is also broken withe the proxypass in place, suspect this is cookie related also. ASP site works ok when run from a domain/ip address. Use of a separate domain / sub-domain is not an option duew to client requirements.

    Read the article

  • Unextending Sharepoint 2007 Web Application from a zone

    - by dunxd
    When our Sharepoint was migrated from Sharepoint 2003 to Sharepoint 2007 (both fully paid versions), the consultants who carried it out extended each web app into two IIS sites/zones (e.g. the original Web App was http://intranet, then http://newintranet and http://intranet would be created for Sharepoint 2007 - each with its own IIS site). The idea was that during the migration period we would set up DNS to point the old url to SP2003 servers and the new one to SP2007, then once the migration was complete, do a DNS change so the SP2007 would recieve the requests to the http://intranet type URLs. Unfortunately the contractors did not tidy up the application extensions and IIS sites after the migration, and for some time both URLs were in use, resulting in many document links pointing to the http://newintranet type URLs. This means I need to maintain these URLs. Due to a rejig of organisation structure we now need to relocate some Sharepoint sites, and I'd like to use the RDA Collaboration Sharepoint URL Redirector feature. However a limitation of this is that it doesn't work for Web Applications which have been extended into multiple zones. So I have a need to tidy up the situation that our consultants left behind. I think the right thing to do is use the "Remove Sharepoint from IIS Web Site" page in Central Admin to remove the zone for the newintranet type sites, and select the option to also delete the IIS site. That should result in having no IIS sites listening for http://newintranet type URLs. Is this the right procedure? Once I have done that I need to set up Sharepoint to receive requests sent to the http://newintranet type URLs so they will continue to work. I am not sure if I should do this: using Alternative Access Mappings or, by adding a host header to the IIS site or, creating a non Sharepoint IIS site for each http://newintranet type URL, and use IIS redirection to forward the requests to the new URL using variables to pass the path to the Sharepoint site. Does anyone have any thoughts on these options, or any other way of achieving this? Sharepoint 2007 is running on Windows 2003 with IIS6. We don't currently have plans/budget to upgrade to Sharepoint 2010.

    Read the article

  • How can I decrease relevancy of Creative Commons footer text? (In Google Webmaster Tools)

    - by anonymous coward
    I know that I may just have to link the image to make this happen, but I figured it was worth asking, just in case there's some other semantic markup or tips I could use... I have a site that uses the textual Creative Commons blurb in the footer. The markup is like so: <div class="footer"> <!-- snip --> <!-- Creative Commons License --> <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/80x15.png" /></a><br />This work by <a xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="http://www.xmemphisx.com/" property="cc:attributionName" rel="cc:attributionURL">xMEMPHISx.com</a> is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/">Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License</a>. <!-- /Creative Commons License --> </div> Within Google Webmaster Tools, the list of relevant keywords is heavily saturated with the text from that blurb. For instance, 50% of my top-ten most relevant keywords (including the site name): [site name] license [keyword] commons creative [keyword] alike [keyword] attribution [keyword] I have not done any extensive testing to find out rather or not this list even matters, and so far this doesn't impact performance in any way. The site is well designed for humans, and it is as findable as it needs to be at the moment. But, out of mostly curiosity: Do you have any tips for decreasing the relevancy of the text from the Creative Commons footer blurb?

    Read the article

  • How does one set up API on a locally hosted server...

    - by L33tCh
    I am setting up a personal Wordpress site and want to be able to post to it from other sites... the common request being for my "API Key". When creating a site on Wordpress.com for example, and API key is sent to you by mail, but surely it should be relatively simple, (if not just an address on the local site to point to,) to have one for a personal server (ubuntu server)?

    Read the article

  • IIS 7.5 returning 404 for unknown host names

    - by WaldenL
    This just doesn't seem correct to me, so I'm looking for someone to tell me how I've misconfigured IIS... Configuration is IIS7.5 (2008R2), without SP1. I have IIS 7.5 configured w/several sites. ALL sites have hostnames defined in the bindings, there is NO site w/out a hostname. However, if I request an unknown hostname from the server IIS (technically Microsoft-HTTPAPI/2.0) return a 404 error, not a 400 error. I would expect a 400 (or some other major error) rather than a lowly 404. This causes a problem when I have nginx in front of multiple IISs and want to stop a site so nginx takes it out of rotation. Since IIS still returns a 404 for the request even when there is no active site for that name, nginx doesn't know the server is dead. NB: IIS returns the 404 regardless of whether there is a server, but it's stopped, or there is no server. Thoughts? Solutions? -- Additional info: OK, I added a site on a port other than 80 (5000) and then on a connection to that port asked for a site that doesn't exist, and I get the expected error 400 (Invalid hostname). So, while IIS isn't listening for generic (no host name) connections on port 80 it would seem that something is. Any ideas how to get HTTPSys to dump the list of what it's listening for?

    Read the article

  • Weird IIS with Windows Authentication + IE problem

    - by Paulius Maruška
    I have a website running on IIS and using Windows Authentication. All users that are configured to get access to the site are form a AD domain (not local users). In the properties of a Website, I have set to use the AD domain as the realm. Now, when using Firefox, Safari or Chrome - Everything is fine. When the user tries to open the site, he get's the login box. he enters simply "username" and "password" (let's pretend that it's an actual login and password :P) and he get's into the site. When using IE, however, things get nasty. When the user tries to open the site - he get's the login box. User enters the "username" and "password" again, but those get rejected! And when the second time login box pops up - it has the username filled in as "web-server-domain-name\username" which is wrong, because web-server-domain-name is not the domain where all users reside (it's "ad-domain"). I've spent days trying to figure out what's going on... Note, that if I manually enter "ad-domain\username" - I get accepted into the site without problems. So, my guess is that IE sends wrong username if domain is not specified. Anyway, IE is the only browser that triggers this behavior! Is it possible to do a server-side fix? Maybe it's possible to somehow auto-map the users to AD users? If it's not solvable server-side - is there a client-side fix for this? Thank you. PS: I'm more of a programmer than a sys-admin, so configuring servers isn't the strong side of mine... :P UPDATE: @Evan: Yes, "Digest authentication for Windows domain servers" is also enabled. @Eric: IIS version is 6.0. The authentication methods enabled are: Integrated and digest - all other methods are disabled. As for the security log. I looked at it, when doing "username" and "password" login in Chrome/Firefox and when doing "ad-domain\username" and "password" login from IE - the generated log messages are the same (I see no difference, anyway). When entering "username" and "password" I don't see any errors in the security (or any other) log, so can't tell what method it's trying to use. UPDATE 2: As suggested by Eric in the comments - I played around with Fiddler... While playing with it, I noticed, that when "username" and "password" is entered in FF and IE - the "Authorization" header value (encrypted) sent by IE is longer (almost two times) than one sent by FF. I tried to disable Windows Integrated authentication and only leave the Digest enabled - that fixed the problem (meaning, IE used the right realm just like other browsers), but that caused bazillion other problems with my site, because with Digest - user impersonation on the server doesn't work (that causes problems, when connecting to database etc). Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • FTP restrict user access to a specific folder

    - by Mahdi Ghiasi
    I have created a FTP Site inside IIS 7.5 panel. Now I have access to whole site using administrator username and password. Now, I want to let my friend access a specific folder of that FTP site. (for example, this path: \some\folder\accessible\) I can't create a whole new FTP Site for this purpose, since it says the port is being used by another website. How to create an account for my friend to have access to just an specific folder? P.S: I have read about User Isolation feature of IIS 7.5, but I couldn't find how to create a user just for FTP and set it to a custom path.

    Read the article

  • I need a relatively cheap host, which will be able to handle sudden peaks in traffic?

    - by Morten K
    Hello, We're launching a product in a few months, which will obviously have a website. Judging from our current traffic, we believe that overall traffic will probably not be that much, but we are aiming at promoting the site heavily using social media. This has the typical problem, that IF we get suddenly get picked up by a large tech blog, we will see a sudden burst: A very heavy increase in traffic all of the sudden. If we use a cheap charlie host as our current host is (www.unoeuro.com) or something similar like GoDaddy, I'm afraid that the site will go down under the load. If that happens, then we might as well have thrown our social media marketing dollars out of the window. Our site will be relatively lightweight, all videos hosted at Youtube or Vimeo and other than that mainly just a standard webpage (ie nothing too heavy). I am hoping for recommendations for a good hosting company, which has some form of scalable hosting, so if / when a traffic surge hits, the site will not go down.

    Read the article

  • Moving a Drupal between linux servers, best practice to avoid file-ownership problems

    - by zero
    I want to port over a Drupal commons 6x24 from a local LAMP-stack to a production webserver. Both systems run OpenSuse Linux. How do I do this, what are the most important steps. How should I handle file-ownership. It's important for me to have to have full control of the file ownership. If I use the wwwrun account, I frequently run into problems, due to a very strict webserver-admin. See for example the long history of looking for fixes and solutions see this thread and even more interesting see this very long and impressive thread here. All troubles I run into have to do with file-owernship and permissions. This is my current setup; Note: This was just a quick hacked installation - quick and dirty. Well my interest is after the general options i have in the port of a drupal from linux to linux linux-vi17:/srv/www/htdocs/com624 # ls -l insgesamt 224 -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 45285 19. Jan 00:54 CHANGELOG.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 925 19. Jan 00:54 COPYRIGHT.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 206 19. Jan 00:54 cron.php drwxrwxrwx 2 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 includes -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 923 19. Jan 00:54 index.php -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 1244 19. Jan 00:54 INSTALL.mysql.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 1011 19. Jan 00:54 INSTALL.pgsql.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 47073 19. Jan 00:54 install.php -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 15572 19. Jan 00:54 INSTALL.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 14940 19. Jan 00:54 LICENSE.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 1858 19. Jan 00:54 MAINTAINERS.txt drwxrwxrwx 3 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 misc drwxrwxrwx 35 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 modules drwxrwxrwx 4 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 profiles -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 1470 19. Jan 00:54 robots.txt drwxrwxrwx 2 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 scripts drwxrwxrwx 4 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 sites drwxrwxrwx 7 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 themes -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 26250 19. Jan 00:54 update.php -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 4864 19. Jan 00:54 UPGRADE.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 294 19. Jan 00:54 xmlrpc.php linux-vi17:/srv/www/htdocs/com624 # thx to BetaRides answer here a quick overview on the drush functionality with rsync http://drush.ws/ core-rsync Rsync the Drupal tree to/from another server using ssh. Examples: drush rsync @dev @stage Rsync Drupal root from dev to stage (one of which must be local). drush rsync ./ @stage:%files/img Rsync all files in the current directory to the 'img' directory in the file storage folder on stage. Arguments: source May be rsync path or site alias. See rsync documentation and example.aliases.drushrc.php. destination May be rsync path or site alias. See rsync documentation and example.aliases.drushrc.php. Options: --mode The unary flags to pass to rsync; --mode=rultz implies rsync -rultz. Default is -az. --RSYNC-FLAG Most rsync flags passed to drush sync will be passed on to rsync. See rsync documentation. --exclude-conf Excludes settings.php from being rsynced. Default. --include-conf Allow settings.php to be rsynced --exclude-files Exclude the files directory. --exclude-sites Exclude all directories in "sites/" except for "sites/all". --exclude-other-sites Exclude all directories in "sites/" except for "sites/all" and the site directory for the site being synced. Note: if the site directory is different between the source and destination, use --exclude-sites followed by "drush rsync @from:%site @to:%site" --exclude-paths List of paths to exclude, seperated by : (Unix-based systems) or ; (Windows). --include-paths List of paths to include, seperated by : (Unix-based systems) or ; (Windows). Topics: docs-aliases Site aliases overview with examples Aliases: rsync

    Read the article

  • pros-cons of separate hosting accounts versus using addon domain

    - by hen3ry
    Folks: For historical reasons, I have "Site A" on "Hosting Account A", and "Site B" on "Account B", totally independent accounts with the same vendor, Bluehost. Both are primary domains. Now that Hosting Account B is just about to expire, I'm considering letting it disappear and moving Site B to an Addon domain on "Account A". Both sites are non-commercial, narrow-interest, very-low-traffic, hundreds of page views per month. The file weights for the sites are non-trivial, especially as I like to install specialized CMSs in subdomains. Since Bluehost allows unlimited hosting space there should be no issue with the file load, except I've seen hints of an issue with total file count, maybe 50k files -- which I'm not currently close to hitting, but might eventually. My question: what are the pros and cons of using separate accounts versus hosting Site B as an addon domain? Obviously, using a single account is cheaper by half, and I know that my authoring environment (DreamWeaver CS5) complains when it detects nested source trees, telling me "Synchronization" might fail in such cases, but I don't depend on this feature. What other factors should I consider? TIA

    Read the article

  • Securing php on a shared apache

    - by Jack
    I'm going to install apache+php in a server where two users, A and B, will deploy their website. I'm trying to achieve isolation of users' space for security reasons: that is no scripts from site A should be able to read files in site B. To achieve this I installed suphp. Website files of user A are owned by A:A with perm=700 and user of B are owned by B:B with perm=700. Suphp works great, but apache complains about permissions to read .htaccess. How can I let apache to read .htaccess in every dir of A and B while keeping isolation between site A and site B? I played with ownership (group = www-data) and permissions (750) but I found no way to keep isolation granted. Any idea? Maybe by running apache as root, but in this case are there any drawbacks?

    Read the article

  • Can a webite have too many bindings?

    - by justSteve
    IIS7.x on a win08 web version on a dedicated server. I have a site that's serving a few dozen affiliates - many of which are hitting me via a subdomain from their own root domain - all of which have a subdomain specific to their account. E.G. my affiliate named 'Acme' hits my site via: myApp.Acme.com (his root, my app) Acme.MyDomain.com (his account within my root domain) Currently I'm adding each of these as a binding entry in IIS (targeting a discrete IP, not '*'). As I ramp this up to include more affiliates I'm wondering if I should be concerned about how many binding this site handles. Proabaly, in Acme's case I can do without the 'Acme.MyDomain.com' because, in reality, all traffic takes place via myApp.Acme.com. Mine is a niche site - very volume compared to most. At what point do I worry about all those bindings? thx

    Read the article

  • Title of the page in search results and title of google's cached version are different. Why?

    - by Azmorf
    Check this: http://www.google.com/search?q=site:gunlawsbystate.com+kansas+gun+laws The title of the first result is "Kansas Gun Laws - Gun Laws By State". Although, on the page google has cached the title is different: <title>Kansas Gun Laws - Kansas Gun Law - Reciprocity Guide</title> Google shows the title that has been on the site 2-3 months ago. Google bot has visited the website a lot of times since that, and as you see it even cached it (the latest version is of 15th Sept), however for some reason it doesn't change the title to the new one in the search results. We use hash-bang URL structure on this website. It completely meets google's requirements for AJAX websites (_escaped_fragment_ stuff). The issue I explained is happening with almost all hash-bang pages that got indexed. Questions: Why does it keep old page title in the search results? Can it be connected to the fact that I'm using hash-bang URLs? There are lots of pages on the site that have the same issue, all of them have hash-bang URLs. Another thing I noticed is that Google's "Preview" feature doesn't work for any hash-bang URLs on the site. Did I do anything wrong? It has got cached versions of the pages, why wouldn't it generate a preview? Thanks (and sorry for my English) PS. Here's a weird thing I also noticed: this search query https://www.google.com/search?q=Kansas+Gun+Laws+-+Reciprocity+Guide shows the correct title for the same page as in the example above. Why does google show different titles for the same page when you run different queries?

    Read the article

  • Wiki Application With A Reputation System

    - by Christofian
    I'm really impressed with Stack Exchange's concept of reputation (you gain reputation as you post, and the more you post, the more privileges you get), and I want to apply the concept to a wiki that I am building. Does anyone know of a php wiki that has a concept of privileges/reputation similar to Stack Exchange? I'm not necessarily looking for something identical to SE, I'm just looking for a wiki application that gives users more privileges the more they contribute positively to the wiki (SE has down votes, the wiki should have some way of identifying negative contributions too). The privileges should be category based, so the more active you are in a specific category or page, the more privileges you get for that category. There should also be site wide privileges as well, though those should be harder to access than the category privileges. NOTE: If it is not possible to get category wide privileges and site wide privileges, I will be OK with just category wide privileges or just site wide privileges. I should be able to change the requirements for each privilege, through a administration panel or through editing a file (some wiki applications don't have administration interfaces). Does anyone have a script or a solution that will do this? If the script uses something similar to reputation to determine how much a user has positively contributed to the site, then that is OK too. Please Note: I am looking for a way to rate individual user contributions, not a way to rate the quality of an entire page.

    Read the article

  • Adventures in Drupal multisite config with mod_rewrite and clean urls

    - by moexu
    The university where I work is planning to offer Drupal hosting to staff/faculty who want a Drupal site. We've set up Drupal multisite with clean urls and it's mostly working except for some weird redirects. If you have two sites where one is a substring of the other then you'll randomly be redirected to the other site. I tracked the problem to how mod_rewrite does path matching, so with a config file like this: RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/drupal RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /drupal/index.php?q=$1 [last,qsappend] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/drupaltest RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /drupaltest/index.php?q=$1 [last,qsappend] /drupaltest will match the /drupal line and all of the links on the /drupaltest page will be rewritten to point to /drupal. If you put the end of string character ($) at the end of each rewrite condition then it will always match on the correct site and the links will always be rewritten correctly. That breaks down as soon as a user logs in though because the query string is appended to the url so just the base url will no longer match. You can also fix the problem by ordering the sites in the config file so that the smallest substring will always be last. I suggested storing all of the sites in a table and then querying, sorting, and rewriting the config file every time a Drupal site is requested so that we could guarantee the order. The system administrator thought that was kludgy and didn't address the root problem. Disabling clean urls should also fix the problem but the users really want them so I'd prefer to keep them if possible. I think we could also fix it by using an .htaccess file in each site to handle the clean url rewriting but that also seems suboptimal since it will generate a higher load on the server and the server is intended to host the majority of the university's external facing web content. Is there some magic I can do with mod_rewrite to get it to work? Would another solution be better? Am I doing something the wrong way to begin with?

    Read the article

  • Consolidating multiple domain names

    - by Mike
    I have a client that has three separately hosted copies of their website, each on a separate domain name. The websites are all essentially the same, bar a few discrepancies caused by badly managed updates in the past. I will soon be launching a completely new website for them, at which point, all three domain names are to resolve to the same web server. One domain name will become the default domain name that they refer to in all their literature, and the other two will simply be used as catch-alls for old links, bookmarks, and so on. I would like to know what people consider the best route to achieve this. My plan so far is: Get the new site up and running on the new webserver. Change the relevant A record of the default domain name to point to the new webserver. a) Keep the existing hosting accounts in operation. Create a list of 301 redirects from old page names on the old site to new page names on the new site. or b) Configure CNAME records for the non-default domain names, each pointing to the new webserver. Create a list of 301 redirects on the new site that redirect from old page names to new page names. If my understanding is correct, 3a will help to maintain whatever search engine rankings the sites already have (I know it's not going to be perfect), while at the same time informing search engines that the old domain names are no longer in use. What's a good approach to take here?

    Read the article

  • Naming your website longname.com vs shortcatchy.net vs shortcatchy.info

    - by jskye
    I'm designing a website that will basically be a social network for sharing information. I have the domain $$$$d.net and the same domain $$$$d.info where $$$$ is a word (that runs into the d) pertaining to the purpose of the site . The .com of this domain was already taken, but they've got nothing showing. They only have a not reached google error showing ie. dont seem to be trying to sell it either. I also have the long name of the site $$$$------&&&&&&&&&.com where the words $$$$ and &&&&&&&&& would contribute relevant seo to the site. In fact the word $$$$------ would also if a one letter spelling mistake is recognised at all by google, which i doubt but am unsure about. But as a brandname the $$$$------ word still works relevantly. Which do you think is a better choice to use? The short catchy name with the .info for relevance to information The .net which is more familiar than .info but slightly less relevant maybe. (But i think net as in network still works cos as i said it will be a social networking site). The long, .com domain which has more SEO plus a pun albeit on a spelling mistake. I know its kind of a subjective question and also hard to answer without knowing the name (which I've obfuscated because I'm only in initial design stage) but nevertheless im interested in what some of you guys think.

    Read the article

  • Making internal website available publicly (Win 2008 Server)

    - by endigo
    I have an IIS 7 web site that is running on a Windows 2008 Server (64-bit) VMWare on a Windows 2008 Server (64-bit) Host on my local network. My router is a Firebox XEdge and it has port 80 directed to the IP of the server on VMWare. I can reach the web site from inside the network, but I cannot reach the site from outside the network. I have other web sites that are working through the Firebox, and I am confident that it is configured correctly. I suspect that Windows 2008 server is blocking routed or public addresses, but I have shut down the firewall on the Server that is running on VMWare and the AVG Anti-virus to no avail. How can I make my site available publicly.

    Read the article

  • Website hosted on IIS is not accessbile

    - by Tola Odejayi
    I have two sites set up in IIS on a remote machine RM; one on regular port 80, and the other on port 5773. From my local machine LM, I can access the site on 80, but I cannot access the one on 5773; I get a status code of 502 and an error code of 10060 (A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond) when I try to do this. I can access the 5773 site via IIS when I am logged into RM (i.e. by right clicking on a page on the site and going 'Browse'). I can also access pages on the 5773 site via a browser, again when I am logged into RM. I just can't do the same via a browser when I am logged into LM. I have ensured that port 5773 is open for outgoing traffic on LM. Could the problem be that I also need to ensure that port 5773 is open for inbound traffic on RM?

    Read the article

  • Intermediate SSL Certificates on Azure Websites

    - by amhed
    I have successfully configured an Extended-Validation Certificate on an Azure Website following this article: http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/documentation/articles/web-sites-configure-ssl-certificate/ The main (non-technical) stakeholder of the web application went through great lengths to validate that our site is secure. He went to this site to check the validity of our SSL: http://www.whynopadlock.com/ The site throw the following error: `SSL verification issue (Possibly mis-matched URL or bad intermediate cert.). Details: ERROR: no certificate subject alternative name matches`` The certificate is installed using IP Based SSL instead of SNI. This is done this way because some site visitors still use Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP, which has no support for SNI and throws a security warning. Is my certificate correclty installed? I received three .CRT files from my SSL provider: PrimaryIntermediate.crt SecondaryIntermediate.crt EndCertificate.crt This is how I exported our certificate as a .PFX file to Azure: openssl pkcs12 -export -out myserver.pfx -inkey myserver.key -in myserver.crt

    Read the article

  • Mixed sessions with Classic ASP on IIS 7.5 and Windows 2008 R2 64 bit

    - by Marcin
    Recently had an issues with a server upgrade from IIS 6 on Windows 2003 to IIS 7.5 on Windows 2008 R2 64 bit. We have a number of websites running on Classic ASP. All the sites sit under a particular site, e.g. www.example.com/foo and www.example.com/foobar. On IIS 6 each site was set up as a virtual directory and things worked fine. Since moving to the new set up, a lot of websites seem to have mixed Sessions. To be clear, this is not a app pool recycling issue; rather the sessions are populated with information when the user hits the site and while browsing they get sessions from different sites. We've determined this based on - a few customers called up and reported having their shopping cart with items with names of items belonging to a different site - also our own testing showed that some queries being run would try to bring products in from a different site We've tried - disabling dynamic caching - converting each site to be a virtual application (if I understand correctly, the virtual directory/application concepts were changed/refined somewhat in IIS 7 although to be honest, I'm not clear what the difference is) - various application pool changes (using .NET 2 framework), classic and integrated modes, changing the Process model to NetworkIdentity), all to no avail. The only thing we haven't tried is changing it to run as a 32 bit application. We're not using http only cookies, so when I open up a browser and type document.cookie into the dev console in Firefox/Chrome/IE that there will be multiple ASPSESSIONID=... values whereas previously I believe there was only one. Finally, we use server side JScript for the classic ASP pages, not VBScript, so we have code similar to the below. //the user's login account as a jscript object Session("user") = { email : "[email protected]", id : 123 }; and if we execute a line of code like below: Response.Write( typeof(Session("user")) ); When things are running correctly, we get "object" - as expected. When the Session gets trashed, the output is "unknown" and we are also unable to access the fields within the JScript object (e.g. the .email or .id fields). Much appreciated if anyone can provide any pointers about how to resolve this, everything on google seems to point to different issues.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166  | Next Page >