|
On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 08:52:49AM -0700, Wayne wrote:
> LVS as is does not have the problem. Since
> LVS is based on <sip,sport; vip,vport; rip, rport>
> which is not change between HTTP and HTTPS
> requests, so it works fine. However, any other
> ones, like Cisco or Arrowpoint, unless they add
> SSL terminator (which is not cheap and is not
> very effecient), will not be able to take the
> advantage of cookie persistent.
>
> F5 sales a version with SSL termination with
> ADDITIONAL $6000 charge and only can
> handle up to 120 transaction/s, based on their
> SSL terminator supplier (Rainbow Technology).
> At the mean time, LVS can handle 100,000
> transactions/s, by sharing the load on many
> HTTPS servers.
I havn't had much experience with SSL accelerators,
but for a $6000 price tag, given the litte I know
you should be able to get an accelerator that can do
several 1000 connections/s. That is asside from
weather or not you want to go down that path.
John Casu: Do you have anything to add to this?
> Having SSL termination and cookie persistent is
> actually against the load balancing idea. Instead
> of adding servers to share the load, SSL termination
> actually created a bottleneck. That just proved
> that with enough money to do marketing, a stupid
> idea could become advantage; Like Hitler once
> said, "repeat the lie one thousand times, people will
> believe that is the truth."
--
Horms
|
