From owner-freebsd-isp Sat Jul 8 2:21:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.lawforum.co.za (ns3.dataweb.co.za [196.25.141.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27E4037B579 for ; Sat, 8 Jul 2000 02:21:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rip@pinetec.co.za) Received: from rip by mail.lawforum.co.za with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 13AqsA-00048R-00; Sat, 08 Jul 2000 11:26:06 +0200 Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2000 11:26:06 +0200 From: "R.I.Pienaar" To: Gabriel Ambuehl Cc: Jason Fesler , Luigi Rizzo , Chris Shenton , Alan Batie , isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: load balancing Message-ID: <20000708112606.G10253@pinetec.co.za> References: <11591545084.20000707190001@buz.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <11591545084.20000707190001@buz.ch>; from gabriel_ambuehl@buz.ch on Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 07:00:01PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > What if it's pingable, but ssh failed? And how do you solve the > problems of needing root access to kill the alias? I don't want to > supply an attacker with the root passwords for the another box if he > cracks one of a pair... RSA authentication isn't better for that > matter. you can have it behind a nat box, that monitors the services, the moment anything stop working, you just rewrite its real ip to another box and everything fails over. this ofcource leave you with a nat box again to failover. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message