# Static websites on IPFS over HTTP

**URL:** <https://discuss.ipfs.tech/t/static-websites-on-ipfs-over-http/406>\
**Category:** Help\
**Created:** [May 23, 2017, 12:07am UTC](https://discuss.ipfs.tech/t/static-websites-on-ipfs-over-http/406 "2017-05-23T00:07:55Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![flyingzumwalt](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ipfs.tech/flyingzumwalt/32/12_2.png) [@flyingzumwalt](https://discuss.ipfs.tech/u/flyingzumwalt)\
**Post date:** [May 23, 2017, 12:07am UTC](https://discuss.ipfs.tech/t/static-websites-on-ipfs-over-http/406/1 "2017-05-23T00:07:55Z")

</div>

_From @Asgraf on Mon May 02 2016 08:04:40 GMT+0000 (UTC)_  
  
Would it be possible to host simple static website both via HTTP and IPFS via single open port 80 so as to allow connection both from ipfs clients & from classic http non-ipfs browsers?  
  
  
_Copied from original issue: [IPFS over HTTP · Issue #114 · ipfs-inactive/faq · GitHub](https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/114)_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![flyingzumwalt](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ipfs.tech/flyingzumwalt/32/12_2.png) [@flyingzumwalt](https://discuss.ipfs.tech/u/flyingzumwalt)\
**Post date:** [May 23, 2017, 12:08am UTC](https://discuss.ipfs.tech/t/static-websites-on-ipfs-over-http/406/2 "2017-05-23T00:08:22Z")

</div>

_From @Kubuxu on Mon May 02 2016 09:38:54 GMT+0000 (UTC)_  
  
No with just ipfs software.

It would probably possible to do active filtering using deep packet inspection to split HTTP traffic and ipfs traffic. You would still need a two locally bound ports and it would be quite challenging.

I don’t know what is your use case but I am pretty sure cons outweigh benefits.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![flyingzumwalt](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.ipfs.tech/flyingzumwalt/32/12_2.png) [@flyingzumwalt](https://discuss.ipfs.tech/u/flyingzumwalt)\
**Post date:** [May 23, 2017, 12:08am UTC](https://discuss.ipfs.tech/t/static-websites-on-ipfs-over-http/406/3 "2017-05-23T00:08:40Z")

</div>

_From @lidel on Mon May 02 2016 12:49:33 GMT+0000 (UTC)_  
  
It may be a digression on my end, but if we twist @Asgraf’s question a bit and ask instead:  
_How can I opportunistically upgrade HTTP users of my site to IPFS?_

…then a short answer may be:

- Server owner
  - Publishes static site to IPNS
  - Sets up `dnslink` in site’s `TXT` DNS record (convention: [https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/760#issuecomment-92146567](https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/760#issuecomment-92146567))

- IPFS user
  - Enables DNS support in her browser addon (right now only [Firefox addon](https://github.com/lidel/ipfs-firefox-addon/issues/44) supports this)

* * *

PS. If one really want to use a single port for all incoming connections, HAProxy can be used for hosting HTTPS and SSH on the same port:

- [https://dgl.cx/2010/01/haproxy-ssh-and-ssl-on-same-port](https://dgl.cx/2010/01/haproxy-ssh-and-ssl-on-same-port) (simple split)
- [http://blog.chmd.fr/ssh-over-ssl-episode-4-a-haproxy-based-configuration.html](http://blog.chmd.fr/ssh-over-ssl-episode-4-a-haproxy-based-configuration.html) (SSL inside of TLS tunnel)

In theory, it should be possible to replace SSH detection with IPFS-secific one.