Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 11:40:33 -0500 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG> To: mike@seidata.com Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>, Christopher Sedore <cmsedore@maxwell.syr.edu>, "'freebsd-net@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: clustering/load balancing Message-ID: <60603.922120833@gjp.erols.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 22 Mar 1999 02:50:37 EST." <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903220249100.27709-100000@ns1.seidata.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
mike@seidata.com wrote in message ID <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903220249100.27709-100000@ns1.seidata.com>: > Well... I've looked at a lot of clustering technology, reverse > proxying, etc. and find it ammusing how the SPF is typically just > 'shifted around' rather than eliminated. > > Heh... SPF will drive you to drinking... Orange Juice, at least. > > Later, Most load balancing solutions have some sort of hot-failover between redundant switches. Alteons GigE host adapters even have failover between cards (unfortunately done in software). (anyone know of a FastEther NIC with failover?) Combine that with HSRP'd routers and diverse fiber paths and you're coming pretty damned close to not having a SPoF Gary -- Gary Palmer FreeBSD Core Team Member FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/ for info To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?60603.922120833>