The post advocates for using custom local domains, like project.localhost or api.localhost, instead of just localhost for development. This approach offers several benefits, including easier configuration of virtual hosts, clearer separation of different projects, and more realistic testing environments, especially for cookie handling and CORS issues. The author guides readers through setting up these custom domains using either the system's hosts file or a local DNS resolver like dnsmasq, and explains how to generate wildcard SSL certificates with mkcert for secure HTTPS connections on these local domains. This setup mirrors production environments more closely, making development smoother and more efficient.
The blog post ".localhost Domains" explores the benefits and methods of using custom local domains instead of relying solely on localhost or 127.0.0.1 during web development. The author posits that employing descriptive domain names like myproject.localhost or api.myproject.localhost offers several advantages in terms of organization, clarity, and more closely mirroring production environments. This approach facilitates better management of multiple projects simultaneously, especially when dealing with complexities like subdomains, cookies, and cross-origin resource sharing (CORS).
The author then delves into the technical aspects of setting up these custom local domains. The primary mechanism discussed involves modifying the system's hosts file, a fundamental component that maps domain names to IP addresses. Specific instructions are provided for editing the hosts file on various operating systems, including macOS, Linux, and Windows. These instructions outline how to add entries that associate the desired local domains (e.g., myproject.localhost) with the loopback IP address 127.0.0.1.
Beyond the hosts file modification, the post also touches upon the usage of a local DNS server as an alternative method. While acknowledging its increased complexity compared to the hosts file approach, the author suggests that using a local DNS server can offer more flexibility and potentially better performance, particularly for larger projects or when dealing with dynamic DNS requirements. However, detailed instructions on setting up a local DNS server are not included in the post.
Finally, the post highlights the advantages of utilizing these custom local domains. Specifically, it mentions simplifying cookie management, as cookies are domain-specific. Using distinct local domains avoids cookie conflicts between different projects. Additionally, it emphasizes the ease with which one can simulate realistic cross-origin resource sharing (CORS) scenarios, a crucial aspect of modern web development that often involves interactions between different domains or subdomains. By using custom local domains, developers can accurately test and debug CORS configurations during the development process, preventing unexpected issues in production.
Summary of Comments ( 76 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43644043
Hacker News users discuss the practicality and security implications of using
.localhostdomains. Some highlight potential DNS rebinding attacks if not configured correctly, while others point out that usinglocalhostor127.0.0.1directly is simpler and avoids such risks. A few commenters appreciate the convenience.localhostoffers for testing multiple services on different ports, mimicking production environments more closely. Others suggest alternative solutions like*.testor utilizing a local DNS server. The overall sentiment leans towards caution, with many questioning the added value of.localhostgiven its potential downsides. Several users find the concept interesting but express concerns about broader adoption and potential confusion it might introduce.The Hacker News post titled ".localhost Domains" discussing the article about using real domain names for localhost development sparked a variety of comments, mainly focusing on alternative approaches and the perceived drawbacks of the proposed method.
Several commenters advocated for using
.test, a top-level domain specifically designated for testing purposes, as a more straightforward and standardized solution. They argued it avoids potential DNS conflicts and simplifies the development process. One commenter mentioned their personal preference for using*.wipsubdomains under their primary domain for similar reasons. This approach offers a balance between a realistic development environment and avoiding collisions with production domains.Some users expressed concerns about the complexity and potential issues introduced by modifying the
/etc/hostsfile, especially in collaborative environments. They highlighted the risk of discrepancies between developers' setups and the difficulty in maintaining consistency across teams. This led to discussions about alternative tools and strategies for managing local development environments, such as using a dedicated local DNS server or leveraging containerization technologies like Docker.Another recurring theme in the comments was the importance of matching the development environment as closely as possible to the production environment. Commenters debated the trade-offs between using realistic domain names and the potential complications arising from cookie management, CORS configurations, and other environment-specific settings. Some argued that the proposed approach could lead to unexpected behavior and debugging challenges, while others emphasized the benefits of simulating real-world scenarios during development.
A few commenters shared their personal experiences and preferred workflows for local development, mentioning tools like
dnsmasqand highlighting the importance of considering factors like security and performance when choosing a particular setup. The overall sentiment reflected a preference for simpler, more standardized solutions over the proposed method of using real domain names for localhost, citing concerns about complexity, maintainability, and potential conflicts.