[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  "Andrew Cotter" <andrew dot cotter at somersetcapital dot com>
 To:  <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] Re: Server Load Balancing/failover with m0n0
 Date:  Thu, 26 May 2005 17:03:30 -0400
If you don't want a single point of failure, then two load balancers would
be required.  For simple web serving pen would work fine.    If you are
running applications that require always pointing to the same box, pen will
not work in a failover situation.  Pen stores it's client-to-server map in
memory if I am correct.  That means that if one of the boxes goes down and
you are/were connected to an app on the other side, the new loadbalancer
might or might not point you to the same location.


-----Original Message-----
From: news [mailto:news at sea dot gmane dot org]On Behalf Of Ugo Bellavance
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 4:40 PM
To: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Subject: [m0n0wall] Re: Server Load Balancing/failover with m0n0

Chris Bagnall wrote:
>>	I'd like to do simple failover (optionnaly
>>load-balancing) with 2 web servers in my DMZ behing m0n0wall.
>> Is there a way m0n0 can help me with that?  I looked at pen,
>>VRRPD, heartbeat, but I though I'd make sure my current
>>equipement can't help me.
> You could consider using Squid as a forward proxy. There's some very good
> documentation about doing this for multiple apache servers on the squid
> website.
> In fact, if you're using Apache, it has a pretty respectable proxying
> itself you might want to use.

The fact is that I want to have no single point of failure.


> Regards,
> Chris

To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch