Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Sam
Is this you? Claim Profile »
1 year ago
in The Factor Attraction on Phil Dawes' Stuff
I've used Factor in a class last year and my students were delighted to use it.
1 year ago
in It’s Time to Drop the “www” on dmiessler.com | grep understanding
As Dan noted, it would be ok if browsers were able to use the "_http._tcp.domain-name" SRV record. The reason for the "www" is to be able to indicate on what machine the web server is, which may not be the same as the one that you want "domain-name" alone to be (because, for example, you want to be able to "ssh domain-name" to get to your router).
Moreover, SRV records let you specify not only the host to use but also the port, with priorities when using redundant servers and so on. So no, please do not drop "www" right now, instead fight for having SRV records recognized in browsers.
Moreover, SRV records let you specify not only the host to use but also the port, with priorities when using redundant servers and so on. So no, please do not drop "www" right now, instead fight for having SRV records recognized in browsers.
1 year ago
in It’s Time to Drop the “www” on danielmiessler.com | grep understanding
As Dan noted, it would be ok if browsers were able to use the "_http._tcp.domain-name" SRV record. The reason for the "www" is to be able to indicate on what machine the web server is, which may not be the same as the one that you want "domain-name" alone to be (because, for example, you want to be able to "ssh domain-name" to get to your router).
Moreover, SRV records let you specify not only the host to use but also the port, with priorities when using redundant servers and so on. So no, please do not drop "www" right now, instead fight for having SRV records recognized in browsers.
Moreover, SRV records let you specify not only the host to use but also the port, with priorities when using redundant servers and so on. So no, please do not drop "www" right now, instead fight for having SRV records recognized in browsers.