From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 2 22:54:56 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE5B216A4CF for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2004 22:54:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from santiago.pacific.net.sg (santiago.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.135]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8324843D55 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2004 22:54:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: (qmail 7562 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2004 05:54:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO maxwell6.pacific.net.sg) (203.120.90.212) by santiago with SMTP; 3 Jun 2004 05:54:52 -0000 Received: from pacific.net.sg ([210.24.202.26]) by maxwell6.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP id <20040603055452.UMNW8220.maxwell6.pacific.net.sg@pacific.net.sg>; Thu, 3 Jun 2004 13:54:52 +0800 Message-ID: <40BEBD19.1060501@pacific.net.sg> Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 13:54:33 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky Organization: oceanare pte ltd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040409 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Saber ZRELLI References: <40BDF377.4000900@jaist.ac.jp> <40BE05C0.1090807@pacific.net.sg> <40BE092F.9090402@jaist.ac.jp> <40BE0C13.309@pacific.net.sg> <40BE0F0F.6030805@jaist.ac.jp> <40BE226A.4000109@pacific.net.sg> <40BE2B55.2020709@jaist.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <40BE2B55.2020709@jaist.ac.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: suggestions ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 05:54:56 -0000 Hi, Saber ZRELLI wrote: > > Erich Dollansky wrote: > > if my browser is connected to google and yahoo , then i need to > distinguish what data is coming from whish server , so it can be treated > correctly ... > It will not work for google or yahoo how they work currently. > I think i'm missing something ... > Yes. As simple example is a government site handling some government task like duty collection or purchase orders for the whole country. There is one system which does it all for the government. The impact of a system like this going down will be massive. But we learned since the WTC attack that it can happen. The solution is currently to have fault-tolerant machines on single sites with a very low chance to fail plus some spare sites to take over if the main site really fails. The switch over takes some time and will make the government lose money as the whole country cannot process the data during this period of time. If the clients are now linked via an additional layer in the TCP/IP stack to all sites and it is made sure that all sites are updated concurrently, it will not matter if a site goes down because the other sites will take over automatically On the other side, after having a system like this, there is no need anymore for fault-tolerant hardware on the individual sites as the switch-over to the other sites is done automatically from outside. As a result the cost of such systems will drop. I know that such systems exist but they are tailor made and they are not off-the-shelve solution integrated somewhere into the operating system. Erich