Jesper Skriver wrote:
On Tue, Nov 17, 1998 at 07:53:18AM +0900, Katsuhiro Kondou wrote:
In article <19981116200208.A27675@magnet.at>, Michael Haba <m.haba@magnet.at> wrote;
} To cut a long story short, I was just wondering if people could extrapolate } their feelings regarding commerical Web Cache solutions. In terms of the } good, the bad and the ugly. }
Why use things like this, use a default route to a HSRP address ...
Because you move your single point of failure back to the cache ethernet interface. Not a great tragedy if you've got a decent keep-alive from your l4 switch, but you lose all caching. Many of the applicances have dual ethers, but none (to the best of my knowledge) have implemented a failover. My preference is also for a load balance between two ethers, with failover on fault detection - but for the moment I'd be real happy with a simple failover. Note that this does not apply to the platform-based systems (e.g. Inktomi). daniel rothman