Hey John- 1)“Last Resort Alternate domain” is incredibly similar to the Bypass FQDN. I’d rather see us enhance the Bypass FQDN with an optional scheme and port number, rather than add something so close in functionality.
2) Is there a definite need for the “To content origin” checkbox? If this is only used when Bypass FQDN/Alternate domain is not configured, then we could just ask the user to configure the Origin FQDN in this field. 3) Alternate Domain and Error domain also seem incredibly similar in the proposal. Would error domain be better described as “Redirect location for unknown delivery service FQDNs or blocked clients. If not set, TR would typically return a 503” —Eric > On Apr 2, 2018, at 7:43 AM, John Shen (weifensh) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi guys, > > We are planning to add a Last-resort routing feature to Traffic Control. It > will make TR redirect a request to an alternate domain, an error domain, or > an origin server when there is not suitable cache available (e.g. all caches > are busy). It is similar with current “Bypass FQDN” in TC, but it adds more > parameters like redirecting to error domains or origin servers. > > All the new parameters will be configured through “DS Profile” (to avoid GUI > and DB schema changes), which is different with the current GUI configuration > of “Bypass FQDN”. So the design will not change the current “Bypass FQDN” > feature, and just add Last-resort as another extra feature. If Last-resort > feature is not enabled (by default), the current behavior of Traffic Router > will not change. > > Please refer to following doc for more details: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ttrZUGoGZTdCT6g78v62xBVoDCC_cWesPzxfLaHBcp0/edit > > Any comments are welcome. > > Thanks, > John >
