>>>>> "James" == James Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 2. Servers must be physically located on different campuses - >> because we connect tot he 'net through AARNET, we want them on >> different RNO's. >> >> 3. There must be NO DISCERNABLE INTERRUPTION TO SERVICE when one >> fails. Doing a "shift-reload" in the browser is NOT an option. It >> must be TOTALLY TRANSPARENT. James> Wow. Well, point 3 makes it pretty hard. As I understand it, James> that's an intentional design decision of tcp/ip -- if it were James> easy to have another computer interrupt an existing tcp James> connection and just take it over, then I'm sure it would be If you're only serving static content, that's not an issue: HTTP version 1 uses a new tcp/ip connexion for each request anyway, With round-robin DNS you may end up with different images on the same page being served from different servers anyway. Personally I'd go with round-robin DNS, and try to detect failure and update the DNS fast. Some people's browsers would appear to hang for a short while when attempting to access the next page, until the DNS caught up (this implies using a short timeout on the name). Peter C -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
