Joseph Mack NA3T wrote: > topic as anyone else who's posted here, so I expect you're > going to have to nut it out yourself. Any experience you > get, I'd be very happy to hear about. >
Sure, will do. Thus far I see Apache can be made to do it - at least 2.2, if not 2.0. But that would be moving the load balancing to Apache userland and such is not my first choice. > If you move the SSL off-loading to the director, you'll have > to use LVS-NAT so that the return packets go through the SSL > apparatus on the way back to the clients. > Should have said I *am* using LVS-NAT - whoops! Thanks for the reminder. > > do you know about the -dh scheduler as a replacement for > persistence? > No, but thanks for the tip. >> If we have to do SSL offloading the load balancer boxes >> themselves look like good candidates, >> > > do you have enough cpu power in a single director to handle > the encoding/decoding for the number of realservers you > have? > > Joe > Good question and the answer is yes, at least in the short term. Dave _______________________________________________ LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - [email protected] Send requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
