why www?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Jose, Dec 29, 2005.

  1. Jose

    Jose Guest

    What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what does
    www2 mean? What is the difference between a site like www.mysite.com
    and mysite.com?

    Jose
    --
    You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
    for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
    Jose, Dec 29, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jose wrote:

    > What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what does
    > www2 mean?


    'www' is just a convention that has been established in the early days of
    the WWW. You can use any name as the subdomain part or none at all.
    Names like www2 are sometimes used when there are more than one machine
    hosting a website (load-balancing - you'll only have to worry about such
    things, if you have to host a high-traffic site).

    > What is the difference between a site like www.mysite.com
    > and mysite.com?


    These are different domainnames and could be used to host different sites -
    but usually both names point to the same site.

    If you care about your search engine ranking, you should only use one name
    for your site - either www.example.org or example.org, whatever you prefer
    (and configure the 'unused' domain to redirect to the 'official' domain).

    --
    Benjamin Niemann
    Email: pink at odahoda dot de
    WWW: http://www.odahoda.de/
    Benjamin Niemann, Dec 29, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jose

    David Segall Guest

    Jose <> wrote:

    >What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what does
    >www2 mean? What is the difference between a site like www.mysite.com
    >and mysite.com?
    >
    >Jose

    In the beginning every computer on the Internet had a unique address.
    To send a message to one of them you worked from right to left so you
    sent a message to .com which knew the address of mysite.com which knew
    the address of fredscomputer.mysite.com. A convention arose so that
    you could expect a service to be provided by a computer that had a
    suitable name. ftp.mysite.com handled all the FTP file transfers and
    pop3.mysite.com handled all the incoming mail. Similarly, the computer
    named www located at mysite.com is expected to handle all the http
    requests.

    The concept is simple but since there are a few computers on the way
    they are likely to do some translations for you. If you enter
    mysite.com into your browser it may translate it to www.mysite.com
    before it accesses the Internet. A computer at mysite.com, or along
    the way, could send all http requests to the machine called
    fredscomputer.mysite.com but that computer can be programmed to
    display the location as www.mysite.com. It may forward some requests
    to another computer called www2.mysite.com. To add to the confusion
    there can be a few hundred computers cooperating to look like one
    computer called, for example, www.google.com.
    David Segall, Dec 29, 2005
    #3
  4. Jose

    Guest

    Jose wrote:
    > What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what does
    > www2 mean? What is the difference between a site like www.mysite.com
    > and mysite.com?
    >
    > Jose
    > --
    > You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.



    So you are saying that love is helpless?

    --
    dorayme
    , Dec 29, 2005
    #4
  5. Jose

    Jose Guest

    > [re: my sig]
    > So you are saying that love is helpless?


    Love wells up (or not) of its own accord, and not as a result of a
    conscious choice to have those feelings.

    Jose
    --
    You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
    for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
    Jose, Dec 29, 2005
    #5
  6. Jose

    Guest

    Jose wrote:
    > > [re: my sig]
    > > So you are saying that love is helpless?

    >
    > Love wells up (or not) of its own accord, and not as a result of a
    > conscious choice to have those feelings.
    >
    > Jose


    But one can bet that the feeling will come up if one gets a chance with
    someone one sees or meets... I don't think it is so cut and dried. BTW,
    the answers to your question have been well meant but not as clear as
    they could be...I might have to have a go myself if someone with the
    knowledge does not do a better job...

    BTW, Mark, old son, we did thrash them and how....
    , Dec 30, 2005
    #6
  7. [OT] Was Re: why www? Now SIGs.

    wrote:
    > Jose wrote:
    >
    >>What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what does
    >>www2 mean? What is the difference between a site like www.mysite.com
    >>and mysite.com?
    >>
    >>Jose
    >>--
    >>You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.

    >
    >
    >
    > So you are saying that love is helpless?
    >


    There are probably a lot who have 'befriended/married' those who have a
    big house or bank balance and had chosen not to fall in love with
    someone who goes through garbage cans and stands on street corners
    shouting at passing cars! ;-)

    I prefer Gandhi's "A coward is incapable of exhibiting love; it is the
    prerogative of the brave."

    Richard.
    Richard Brooks, Dec 30, 2005
    #7
  8. Jose wrote:
    > What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what does
    > www2 mean? What is the difference between a site like www.mysite.com
    > and mysite.com?
    >
    > Jose


    Personally, I think the "www" prefix is outdated. I never type it in
    anymore, 'cause if a site requires the prefix, Firefox handles it nicely.

    Firefox is my best friend.


    Cheers,
    Daniel
    Daniel Schierbeck, Dec 30, 2005
    #8
  9. Jose

    Jose Guest

    Re: [OT] Was Re: why www? Now SIGs.

    > and had chosen not to fall in love with...

    had chosen not to get close enough to allow it to happen. Different.

    Jose
    --
    You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
    for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
    Jose, Dec 30, 2005
    #9
  10. Jose

    Jose Guest

    Re: [OT] Was Re: why www? Now SIGs.

    says... (moved to this thread)
    > But one can bet that the feeling will come up if one gets a chance with
    > someone one sees or meets...


    I don't get that feeling with everyone I meet. And I bet that if the
    feeling does well up for real, you can't (easily) shove it back down.

    > I don't think it is so cut and dried.


    Nothing is. Life can't be reduced to a sig, but sometimes a piece of it
    can be illuminated from a different angle thus.

    Jose
    --
    You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
    for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
    Jose, Dec 30, 2005
    #10
  11. Jose

    Neo Geshel Guest

    Benjamin Niemann wrote:
    > Jose wrote:
    >>What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what does
    >>www2 mean?

    > 'www' is just a convention that has been established in the early days of
    > the WWW. You can use any name as the subdomain part or none at all.
    > Names like www2 are sometimes used when there are more than one machine
    > hosting a website (load-balancing - you'll only have to worry about such
    > things, if you have to host a high-traffic site).


    This is not entirely true. Load-balancing involves work done at the DNS
    and server level, not at the subdomain level. With Load-Balancing, you
    could have 100 servers handling requests from web surfers, but you would
    not notice any difference between them in terms of the domain name.

    Usually any usage of “www2†or the like is usually the result of a lack
    of creativity *somewhere* in the chain of responsibility for setting up
    a subdomain. Subdomains are supposed to provide the ability to set up
    different “sub-sites†that are tightly related to a main,central site
    (“wwwâ€), and as such, should be named accordingly (“extranet.domain.comâ€
    for a company extranet, “ftp.domain.com†for a public FTPstore,
    “mail.domain.com†for e-mail servers, etc., etc.).

    FYI, load balancing involves setting a domain name to point to multiple
    IP addresses. Each server that has one of the IP addresses runs not only
    the web server, but also load-balancing software. This software creates
    a network between the servers that emulates one large, super-powerful
    server, so that if a visitor uses one server, and that server gets
    overloaded, the visitor can be transparently switched over to another
    server without the visitor ever knowing that it occurred. The
    load-balancing software ensures that the user's session with the one
    server is transported across the entire network of load-balanced
    servers, so that any one of them can pick up that user transparently if
    the first server gets overloaded.

    >>What is the difference between a site like www.mysite.com
    >>and mysite.com?

    > These are different domainnames and could be used to host different sites -
    > but usually both names point to the same site.
    >
    > If you care about your search engine ranking, you should only use one name
    > for your site - either www.example.org or example.org, whatever you prefer
    > (and configure the 'unused' domain to redirect to the 'official' domain).


    Using just “domain.com†is bad form. The whole point of asubdomain is
    to specify a service under the umbrella of the domain name. “wwwâ€
    specifies a web site. “ftp†specifies a public ftp store.And so on.
    When you use just a domain name “http://domain.comâ€, you have to do
    extra work on the DNS side to ensure that any such request gets routed
    properly. My first host (and any of the major web hosts before 1998 or
    so) never set up “domain.com†to point anywhere; a user *had* to enter
    “www.domain.com†to get to any of the sites that I had hosted with them,
    and getting them to point “domain.com†to an actual web site cost extra
    because it was an extra DNS entry that had to be maintained.

    This changed once the vast legions of unwashed newbies flooded the
    Internet, and became befuddled when “domain.com†came back “page not
    foundâ€, even though “http://www.domain.com†was clearly printed on all
    of a company’s stationary.

    I hope this helps.
    ...Geshel
    --
    ***********************************************************************
    * My reply-to is an automatically monitored spam honeypot. Do not use *
    * it unless you want to be blacklisted by SpamCop. Please reply to my *
    * first name at my last name dot org. *
    ***********************************************************************
    “Anyone who believes in Intelligent Design (“creationismâ€) is just as
    ignorant and ill-educated as someone who believes that the world is
    flat, that the Sun circles the Earth or that there really is a tooth
    fairy. Darwinism has an overwhelming foundation of evidence that can be
    tested and reproduced. Intelligent Design, on the other hand, has no
    evidence at all; not one single shred of testable proof. As such,
    Intelligent Design is Religious Mythology, and has no right whatsoever
    to be in our Science classrooms.†- 99.99+% of Scientists
    ***********************************************************************
    Mignon McLaughlin once said that “A nymphomaniac is a woman [who is] as
    obsessed with sex as the average man.†Unfortunately, since true
    nymphomaniacs are so rare, this means that it takes an extraordinary
    woman to keep up with an ordinary man.
    ***********************************************************************
    Neo Geshel, Dec 31, 2005
    #11
  12. Jose

    JDS Guest

    JDS, Jan 1, 2006
    #12
  13. Jose

    Greg N. Guest

    Neo Geshel wrote:


    > Using just “domain.com†is bad form. The whole point of a subdomain is
    > to specify a service under the umbrella of the domain name. “wwwâ€
    > specifies a web site. “ftp†specifies a public ftp store. And so on.
    > When you use just a domain name “http://domain.comâ€, you have to do
    > extra work on the DNS side to ensure that any such request gets routed
    > properly. My first host (and any of the major web hosts before 1998 or
    > so) never set up “domain.com†to point anywhere; a user *had* to enter
    > “www.domain.com†to get to any of the sites that I had hosted with them,
    > and getting them to point “domain.com†to an actual web site cost extra
    > because it was an extra DNS entry that had to be maintained.
    >
    > This changed once the vast legions of unwashed newbies flooded the
    > Internet, and became befuddled when “domain.com†came back “page not
    > foundâ€...


    So, in essence, while "domain.com" used to be bad form a decade ago, it
    is OK today, no?

    --
    Gregor's Motorradreisen:
    http://hothaus.de/greg-tour/
    Greg N., Jan 1, 2006
    #13
  14. Jose

    Neredbojias Guest

    Re: [OT] Was Re: why www? Now SIGs.

    With neither quill nor qualm, Richard Brooks quothed:

    > > So you are saying that love is helpless?
    > >

    >
    > There are probably a lot who have 'befriended/married' those who have a
    > big house or bank balance and had chosen not to fall in love with
    > someone who goes through garbage cans and stands on street corners
    > shouting at passing cars! ;-)


    Ah, yes, the memories... You haven't lived until you've had sex in a
    dumpster.

    > I prefer Gandhi's "A coward is incapable of exhibiting love; it is the
    > prerogative of the brave."


    Oh come on! After the first few times, unzipping your fly is a piece of
    cake.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
    Neredbojias, Jan 2, 2006
    #14
  15. Neo Geshel wrote:

    > Benjamin Niemann wrote:
    >> Jose wrote:
    >> Names like www2 are sometimes used when there are more than one machine
    >> hosting a website (load-balancing - you'll only have to worry about such
    >> things, if you have to host a high-traffic site).

    >
    > This is not entirely true. Load-balancing involves work done at the DNS
    > and server level, not at the subdomain level. With Load-Balancing, you
    > could have 100 servers handling requests from web surfers, but you would
    > not notice any difference between them in terms of the domain name.


    I did not claim, that this is *the* way to implement load balancing. There
    are many ways to implement load-balancing, including round-robin DNS
    setups, reverse proxies etc.
    Redirecting users to one of various hosts (sometimes called 'wwwX') is a
    very simple, rather inefficient, but sometimes sufficient kind of
    load-balancing.

    > Usually any usage of ?www2? or the like is usually the result of a lack
    > of creativity *somewhere* in the chain of responsibility for setting up
    > a subdomain. Subdomains are supposed to provide the ability to set up
    > different ?sub-sites? that are tightly related to a main, central site
    > (?www?), and as such, should be named accordingly (?extranet.domain.com?
    > for a company extranet, ?ftp.domain.com? for a public FTP store,
    > ?mail.domain.com? for e-mail servers, etc., etc.).
    >


    > [snip description of DNS based load-balancing]


    >>>What is the difference between a site like www.mysite.com
    >>>and mysite.com?

    >> These are different domainnames and could be used to host different sites
    >> - but usually both names point to the same site.

    >
    > Using just ?domain.com? is bad form. The whole point of a subdomain is
    > to specify a service under the umbrella of the domain name. ?www?
    > specifies a web site. ?ftp? specifies a public ftp store. And so on.


    This was the original intention of the subdomain concept. But today there is
    no real reason for this. Sites are either hosted in a much simpler
    configuration - a single server doing 'everything', and there is no point
    in giving different names to the same server. And large sites use a much
    more sophisticated setup than 'one www, one ftp and one mail server'.

    IMHO subdomain should today used to devide the services by content and not
    by the used protocol - the URI scheme should be used to specify the
    protocol, not the subdomain (which it wouldn't do anyway).

    And (again IMHO) using 'example.com' as the primary portal for a domain is
    valid approach (and supporting www.example.com only as a legacy alias).

    Though I personally prefer 'www.example.com' over 'example.com' - but I
    think it's just a matter of personal preference today.

    --
    Benjamin Niemann
    Email: pink at odahoda dot de
    WWW: http://www.odahoda.de/
    Benjamin Niemann, Jan 2, 2006
    #15
  16. Jose

    Stan McCann Guest

    Jose <> wrote in
    news:59Tsf.387$:

    > What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what
    > does www2 mean? What is the difference between a site like
    > www.mysite.com and mysite.com?


    Legacy. In the beginning (of the www), there were servers each with a
    host name. Then came web server software that ran on servers being set
    up as a www server. There were so few at the time, www became a
    natural host name for the www server. www2 came as a result of
    unimaginative sysadmins setting up a second www server.

    Although unneeded except for those that automatically put www. in front
    of every url, most of my sites accept both methods, ie:
    http://www.abateofnm.org/ and http://abateofnm.org/. One site I manage
    cannot do that as http://www.nmsu.edu/ is New Mexico State University's
    site while http://alamo.nmsu.edu/ is New Mexico State University at
    Alamogordo's. I suppose I could ask for www.alamo.nmsu.edu alias but
    don't really think there is a need.

    --
    Stan McCann "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/pirate.html
    Webmaster/Computer Center Manager, NMSU at Alamogordo
    http://alamo.nmsu.edu/ There are 10 kinds of people.
    Those that understand binary and those that don't.
    Stan McCann, Jan 2, 2006
    #16
  17. Jose

    dorayme Guest

    In article <Xns973F94D67C0A0stanmccann@216.234.192.142>,
    Stan McCann <> wrote:

    > Jose <> wrote in
    > news:59Tsf.387$:
    >
    > > What is the purpose of the common www prefix for websites, and what
    > > does www2 mean? What is the difference between a site like
    > > www.mysite.com and mysite.com?

    >
    > Legacy. In the beginning (of the www), there were servers each with a
    > host name. Then came web server software that ran on servers being set
    > up as a www server. There were so few at the time, www became a
    > natural host name for the www server. www2 came as a result of
    > unimaginative sysadmins setting up a second www server.


    Now this is starting to be a good explanation Stan. (I mildly
    complained before...)
    dorayme, Jan 2, 2006
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?VGltOjouLg==?=

    Why, why, why???

    =?Utf-8?B?VGltOjouLg==?=, Jan 27, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    563
    Juan T. Llibre
    Jan 27, 2005
  2. Horace Nunley

    why why why does function not work

    Horace Nunley, Sep 27, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    455
    =?Utf-8?B?UGV0ZXIgQnJvbWJlcmcgW0MjIE1WUF0=?=
    Sep 27, 2006
  3. Mr. SweatyFinger

    VWD why why why

    Mr. SweatyFinger, Nov 28, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    380
    =?Utf-8?B?Q2lhcmFuIE8nJycnRG9ubmVsbA==?=
    Dec 21, 2006
  4. Mr. SweatyFinger

    why why why why why

    Mr. SweatyFinger, Nov 28, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    875
    Mark Rae
    Dec 21, 2006
  5. Mr. SweatyFinger
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,804
    Smokey Grindel
    Dec 2, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page