I’ve followed this method for over 8 years, but now I’m facing challenges. I’m looking to build version 2 of my API with a different tech stack and host it on new resources, yet my api subdomain is linked to the IP of the old v1 server.
Is this versioning strategy meant solely for handling breaking changes in the same application? It seems like my only options are to switch to api2.example.com or manage redirects. Has anyone experienced something similar?
yeah i’ve been there too mate. url versioning is mainly for backward compatibility when you have breaking changes, but your situation is trickier since you’re switching entire stacks. honestly api2.example.com might be cleaner than dealing with complex routing. alternatively you could proxy v2 requests from your current server to the new one temporarily.
The primary purpose is indeed managing breaking changes while maintaining backward compatibility for existing clients. However, your architectural challenge highlights a common oversight - many developers don’t anticipate infrastructure changes when choosing URL versioning. I faced this exact scenario three years ago when migrating from a monolithic Rails app to microservices. The cleanest solution was implementing a load balancer that could route based on version headers or URL paths to different backend services. This avoided the api2 subdomain approach and maintained the original URL structure. If load balancing isn’t feasible, consider using your current v1 server as a reverse proxy for v2 requests. This preserves your domain structure while you transition clients gradually.
URL versioning serves multiple purposes beyond just breaking changes - it’s also about client control and migration planning. What you’re experiencing is actually quite common when scaling beyond the initial architecture. I ran into this exact issue when our startup outgrew our original infrastructure. The key insight is that URL versioning was never designed to be tightly coupled to specific servers or IP addresses. Consider setting up a simple API gateway or even using your DNS provider’s traffic management features to route different versions to different backends. This way you keep the clean versioning structure while gaining the flexibility to host versions wherever makes sense. The redirect approach works too but can get messy with complex request bodies. Your current pain point is actually a sign that your API is successful enough to warrant better infrastructure - embrace it as a scaling milestone rather than a versioning problem.