Printable View
Me and 2 other students from our school made a altervista site, and we need to use our domain for our site. Our site is writeg3.altervista.org
I cannot find CNAME records anywhere to use for our site. Our domain provider is 1and1 and domain is writeg3.com
You can't use a different domain with an AlterVista website.
Hi, may I get some clarification on this please? For example, say that I set up mydomain.altervista.org, purchased mydomain.com.au from netregistry.com.au, and I control the domain delegation and zone records for it. If I change the netregistry nameservers to altervista nameservers, or add CNAME records for my subdomains, or modify the SOA or A records, are you saying nothing I do will successfully map mydomain.com.au to mydomain.altervista.org, mysubdomain1.mydomain.com.au to mysubdomain1.mydomain.altervista.org, etc.?
If this is the case, then would you please tell me the technical reason? Because I guess I do not understand DNS well enough. Thank you.
You can point an A DNS record to the AlterVista server which hosts your website, but the HTTP server won't be able to provide the site since it doesn't have that domain in the virtual host table.
Ah, I see. Thank you.
I went ahead and bought a .com domain name from Altervista so that Altervista would put it in its HTTP server's virtual host table, but this does not seem to have happened yet, and I cannot find the domain management option for it. Please tell me how to get my new Alterivista .com domain name to be shown for every page in my Altervista website, or please do it for me. Thank you.
Your Altervista domain will not replaced by your second level domain. If you access your new domain you will be redirected to your Altervista website, that's the correct behavior.
You can set the "cloak" mode on your panel to display your domain in the address bar, but your content will still be on the Altervista domain.
We don't offer a so called "virtual host" mode to replace your Altervista domain with a second level one.
I see, thanks. Can I ask what the specific reasons are for not offering a "virtual host" mode? To my noobish understanding, having a website use a name that was paid-for sounds like something very fundamental, valuable, important, and technically unchallenging. Thanks again.