On 12 Nov 2012, at 5:04 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > http://www.jimjag.com/imo/index.php?/archives/248-The-Case-for-a-Universal-Web-Server-Load-Value.html
+1 to the idea of a header, it is simple and unobtrusive, and doesn't give you any security headaches that any out-of-band header would give you. As to the format of the header, perhaps a application/x-www-form-urlencoded string of some kind? It allows us to be extensible if we need to be. For example: X-Server-Load: av1=5.76&av5=0.44&av15=0.10 or X-Server-Load: av1=5.76&av5=0.44&av15=0.10&going-offline-in=22 (You get the idea) If a load balancer wants to query a server that might be offline, it might send an OPTIONS request and if the X-Server-Load permits, the load balancer might ramp that server back up again. Regards, Graham --
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
