Hmm, will the reestablishment of an SSL session be transparent to the end
user?

Regards, Dustin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Tim Fournet
> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 12:12 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [brluglist] Speaking of SSL..
>
>
> [cross-post of my reply to Dustin's cross-post to the Lafix list]
>
> We're doing SSL clustering here using Foundry ServerIrons. These have an
> option to make connections "sticky" which keeps a client hitting the
> same server during his session. SSL also works without it, but then the
> sessions have to be re-established which kinda hurts performance.
>
> Foundry's products have been really great for us. They have a Cisco-like
> configuration language, as well as web front-end. If anyone has any
> questions about them, I'll be happy to help.
>
> -Tim
>
>
> On Thu, 2001-11-08 at 10:22, john beamon wrote:
> > I'm aware of a few recent ads in some sys admin magazines for "hardware"
> > load balancers (that run load balancing software) that do SSL processing
> > on-board.  The SSL tickets and sessions get managed in front of the
> > servers.  I've searched the last two months of SysAdmin and this month's
> > Linux Journal without finding them, but that's definitely the way to go.
> > I'll keep my eyes open.
> >
> > --
> > -j
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, Dustin Puryear wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:16:25 -0600
> > > From: Dustin Puryear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> > >      [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> > >      "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: [brluglist] Speaking of SSL..
> > >
> > > We are using a configuring a cluster from Linux NetworX to
> serve as a web
> > > cluster and we were recently informed by the client that they
> want to use
> > > SSL now. It's simple enough to setup SSL with Apache, but now
> we have an
> > > issue with how SSL will interact with our load balancing and
> fail-over on
> > > the cluster.
> > >
> > > We are using pirahna (we were told it had been modified a
> bit) on a RH6.2
> > > based cluster. Has anyone done this before with SSL? The
> obvious problem is
> > > that our redirector (one of the nodes) may redirect users to
> different web
> > > servers, which would break established SSL sessions.
> > >
> > > Any suggestions, advice, or links? I am going to start doing
> some research,
> > > but leads are always helpful. We would like to not be
> required to purchase
> > > additional hardware or software if possible. I would imagine
> that pirahna
> > > has this capability, or could be modified as desired. Well,
> at least I hope.
> > >
> > > Regards, Dustin
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Dustin Puryear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > http://members.telocity.com/~dpuryear
> > > In the beginning the Universe was created.
> > > This has been widely regarded as a bad move. - Douglas Adams
> > >
> > > ================================================
> > > BRLUG - The Baton Rouge Linux User Group
> > > Visit http://www.brlug.net for more information.
> > > Send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to change
> > > your subscription information.
> > > ================================================
> > >
> >
> > ================================================
> > BRLUG - The Baton Rouge Linux User Group
> > Visit http://www.brlug.net for more information.
> > Send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to change
> > your subscription information.
> > ================================================
>
>
>
> ================================================
> BRLUG - The Baton Rouge Linux User Group
> Visit http://www.brlug.net for more information.
> Send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to change
> your subscription information.
> ================================================
>

================================================
BRLUG - The Baton Rouge Linux User Group
Visit http://www.brlug.net for more information.
Send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to change
your subscription information.
================================================

Reply via email to