On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Andy Davidson wrote:
Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
will the v6 access really be enough to require LB's? or are they there for
other reasons (global lb for content close to customers, regionalized
content) perhaps reasons which would matter 'less' in an initial v6 world
where you were getting the lb's fixed by their vendor? (or finding a
vendor that supports v6 lb?)
I am a keyboard jockey for an international online retailer; I picked our
loadbalancer solution[0] because of the things it did other than balancing
load per se, including cacheing, tcp and ssl session offloading, and content
compression. Yes, you could do much of this with apache/mod_proxy but not
'as well'.
Until such devices support IPv6, to reiterate Steve's point, it's not an
option to consider approaching connectivity suppliers with IPv6 enquiries.
LVS which rather a lot of people use for load balancing supports ipv6 and
has since 2002
PLB pure load balancer (*BSD) supports ipv6.
Since Redhat Enterprise Server currently meets all of our layer-3 load
balancing needs we haven't evaluated other commercial load balancers in
about a year.
[0] Redline Networks E|X, now owned by Juniper of Borg.
-a
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel Jaeggli Unix Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Key Fingerprint: 5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2
