<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">Hi Chris,<div><br></div><div>I understand where you are coming from with your VPN remark.</div><div>But a normal site admin (hosting customer) should not be bothered with setting up a VPN to just make a change or a user to change his/her password.</div><div><br></div><div>Some of my users sometimes complain they cannot connect to port 81 when on a very closed off network.</div><div><br></div><div>Opening up admserv on a site url is up to the person maintaining the BlueOnyx instance.</div><div>If you don’’t want that, don’t set it up.</div><div><br></div><div>It also would allow different admin hostnames for e.g. the reseller functionality.</div><div><br></div><div>Best regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Taco<br id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On 18 Dec 2023, at 15:14, Chris Gebhardt - VIRTBIZ Internet via Blueonyx <blueonyx@mail.blueonyx.it> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div><p>Hi Taco,</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:9821A7E7-639A-435D-8C47-1E09C0A5EB88@blueonyx.nl">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Allowing to map a vsite to the admin url: I have tried to do this with reverse proxy, but unfortunately the admin ui still uses some hard links in various places, mostly to select https/81 http/444, whereas I think all links should be relative anyway. </pre>
</blockquote><p>I agree that relative links are preferred with almost any
architecture. Limited exceptions apply, of course.<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:9821A7E7-639A-435D-8C47-1E09C0A5EB88@blueonyx.nl">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">some enterprise and airport/hotel/airplaine wifi networks sometimes restrict port numbers.
This would allow e.g. creating an “admin.yoursite.com” or something similar.</pre>
</blockquote><p>Just a note on this: VPN should be absolutely mandatory for
sysadmin work. I don't touch an asset without being either onnet
or via VPN and often if remote, VPN to remote desktop on
localnet. I realize you're raising a bit of a different issue,
but nobody should be relying on public wifi networks to manage (or
restrict) your traffic. <br>
</p><p>If you are properly secured behind a VPN then you will bypass
many of the headaches you've mentioned. <br>
</p><div><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:9821A7E7-639A-435D-8C47-1E09C0A5EB88@blueonyx.nl">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">My request is to just get rid of the code that selects the port number and protocol.
Imho, that is not needed anymore.
</pre>
</blockquote><p>I disagree. <br>
</p><p>Having the service on a different port keeps it gapped from the
public-facing web services. And that's fairly standard with the
other control panels I'm familiar with that rely on their own http
server (and therefore a unique port). While that may present the
occasional obstacle, the benefits outweigh the inconvenience.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Chris Gebhardt
VIRTBIZ Internet Services
Access, Web Hosting, Colocation, Dedicated
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.virtbiz.com/">www.virtbiz.com</a> | toll-free (866) 4 VIRTBIZ</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>Blueonyx mailing list<br>Blueonyx@mail.blueonyx.it<br>http://mail.blueonyx.it/mailman/listinfo/blueonyx<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>