SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: [SLUG] Redundant Web Servers
- To: slug@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [SLUG] Redundant Web Servers
- From: "Chris D." <wazza@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 17:05:44 +1000
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
This one time, at band camp, Luke Burton wrote:
>On Monday, June 2, 2003, at 09:16 AM, Jon Biddell wrote:
>> 3. There must be NO DISCERNABLE INTERRUPTION TO SERVICE when one
>> fails. Doing a "shift-reload" in the browser is NOT an option. It
>> must be TOTALLY TRANSPARENT.
>A good compromise might be to have a 'forwarder' machine hosted on a
>highly available, redundant network of your choosing. You make sure
>that the logic in this thing is as simple as possible, so that there is
>a minimised risk of it going wrong. You pay a few $$ to make sure that
>it's on failover hardware, redundant net connections, etc.
Just a thought, maybe just an old Pentium box that does port forwarding.