An important poll for those with multiple domains on a server

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Thanx for the replies so far.

For myself personally it does not matter. I am on a dedicated where I hve one user login allowing me to access all my domains. I am going to one with the control panel.

However, my project makes use of ftp to get around some install issues and I am only storing one ftp user/pass assuming it will control the whole server. Looks like I got a bit of redesign to do on the database.

Thanx again, this really does help.

Here is another thing to consider: If you are building a program to install stuff for other people, they will often create a special username / password with limited access to make sure you can only get to certain stuff. I think more and more people are also very, very leary of leaving you an open password for any length of time. Smart admins would make the password active just long enough for an install and then blow the password out right away so that a NATS style "password leak" doesn't cause any problems.

[DannyCox]

We use both. A single master FTP account for the entire server and then seperate FTP access per domain.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by DannyCox

We use both. A single master FTP account for the entire server and then seperate FTP access per domain.

Yeah, but then don't you have to go in and chown all the files to the proper owner, or you controlling all that at the group?

[DannyCox]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Yeah, but then don't you have to go in and chown all the files to the proper owner, or you controlling all that at the group?

I was talking about the domains we control. For people that are on our network, and do their own HTML, we give them ownership and their own FTP. But we can still access and fix/change things if we have to as our "master" FTP login is in sense an admin login (not root)

[Hell Puppy]

I typically setup boxes for my own personal use similar to what Danny describes. I'll have a master that go anywhere and do anything. Then individual logins per domain.

In some cases now, especially with blogs, I tend to group them by who is working on them. If I have one person dealing with a dozen sites, I'll give them one login that gives them access to that dozen sites and nothing else.

I have been known to get very creative with the use of symbolic links when needed.

I tend to do most of my own SA work, but of the hosts I've worked with, each usually has their own preference as to how they set things up. But I've never seen one resist doing it either way if specifically requested.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Here is another thing to consider: If you are building a program to install stuff for other people, they will often create a special username / password with limited access to make sure you can only get to certain stuff. I think more and more people are also very, very leary of leaving you an open password for any length of time. Smart admins would make the password active just long enough for an install and then blow the password out right away so that a NATS style "password leak" doesn't cause any problems.

This is a distributable. You install it on your server and then it does magical wonderful things for you. The kind you turn on and then it just spits money out of that slot on your computer. ;p

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by sarettah

This is a distributable. You install it on your server and then it does magical wonderful things for you. The kind you turn on and then it just spits money out of that slot on your computer. ;p

The money slot on my machine doesn't work. But I do have two cupholders, but they are stacked one on top of another and I have no idea how to use both of them at the same time unless I get a really short cup for the bottom one.

Seriously, have you considered a downloadable "installed" that does the rest local to the machine, avoiding the whole issue of FTP?

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Seriously, have you considered a downloadable "installed" that does the rest local to the machine, avoiding the whole issue of FTP?

Do you mean a desktop app (windows exe type) ?

I had not considered it if that is what you mean. It is that is not what you mean then please expand.

Thanx

[RawAlex]

No, if you are going to install something (once or multiple times) on a server, then have the user download a single file and upload it to their server, and then execute it, basically have it expand out from a compressed archive or download from your servers remotely once the installer is in place.

This works pretty much all the time, you could even have it call home once a day or once a week to check for updates

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

No, if you are going to install something (once or multiple times) on a server, then have the user download a single file and upload it to their server, and then execute it, basically have it expand out from a compressed archive or download from your servers remotely once the installer is in place.

This works pretty much all the time, you could even have it call home once a day or once a week to check for updates

Ok, gotcha.

That would not work in this particular situation. It would become very clunky very fast as the user would be doing that many many times

[TheEnforcer]

I would never want to use a server that doesn't allow for the single log-in for all domains as an option.