Page is a not externally linkable
- WebmasterWorld
-- Domain Names
---- Is "www" redundant?


Romeo - 10:12 am on Sep 26, 2005 (gmt 0)


I will drop out the 3 redundant "www" too.

So you are telling us that your site is very small.
Yes, if you are hosting all internet services, including the web service, on one small server box, you are free to name that box as you want, with or without a 'www.'

Others companies may have to address more than just one box within their domain name space, as they may have a larger web-server farm, applications server clusters, dedicated mail servers for outgoing and incoming mail services, several ftp download servers, and numerous other servers for various other internet services.
Such entities need to uniquely name each server within their domain name space and do this by assigning sub domain names like host1.example.com, ftp2.example.com, intra4.example.com, appl7, imap4, smtp, ns1, ns2, ns3, and yes, perhaps also www, www1 and www2.example.com for their web services.
In such an environment, where should a http / ftp / dns / whatever request for "example.com" go?

It may even on small boxes be advisable to follow this practice to assign subdomain names to distinguish between www, smtp, pop, imap, and ftp services, so that you can easily move a single service to another box if you will ever grow beyond the limits of that one box without the need to change names.

Regards,
R.


Thread source:: http://www.webmasterworld.com/domain_names/3135.htm
Brought to you by WebmasterWorld: http://www.webmasterworld.com