> >>> - Active/Passive Failover >>> - I think this is solved with multiple pools. >>> >>> The multiple pools support that is coming with L7 rules is to support >>> content-switching based on L7 HTTP information (URL, headers, etc.). There >>> is no support today for an active vs. passive pool. >>> >> I'm not sure that's the priority. It depends on if this is widely >> supported among vendors. >> > > A commercial load balancer that doesn't have high availability features? > Is there really such a thing still being sold in 2014? ;) > I might be missing something fundamental here, but we're talking about 'additional' HA at pool level? Why not just add nodes to the pool?
> > Also, Jorge-- thanks for creating that page! I've made a few additions to > it as well that I'd love to see prioritized. > > > Stephen > > > > > -- > Stephen Balukoff > Blue Box Group, LLC > (800)613-4305 x807 > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev