Michael Nelson wrote:
>
> On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Dave Wreski wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 23, 1999 at 01:47:27PM -0400, Dave Wreski wrote:
> > > > Yes, I'm actually suprised to see M$ using round-robin for their boxes.
> > > > You'd think they'd use something like Cisco's Local Director provide real
> > > > load balancing and failover...
> > >
> > > That wont work for locally distributed server farms, since the redirector
> > > box is a single point of failure. Using round-robin to multiple local
> > > redirectors is better for distributing the load over differen tproviders.
> >
> > Well, yes, that's true. But with M$ reporting 6 web servers, chances are
> > they aren't using local directors at all. I should have completed my
> > statement by saying that having local direcdtors in each of two or more
> > data centers is the best approach. I guess it's possible that microsoft
> > has three local directors in each of two data centers for redundancy is
> > possible...
>
> >From http://www.microsoft.com/backstage/:
>
> "As an added bonus, we have a complete case study that describes how we've
> put Cisco DistributedDirector routers to work on top of our already
> world-class Single IP solution (Windows Load Balancing Service). Now
> customers no longer need to pick mirror sites when they want to download
> files, they just click on a link and, presto, DistributedDirector delivers
> the files from the most appropriate data center. It's not magic, just pure
> technological innovation."
>
If you read it you will see that the CISCO stuff is being used for their
file services worldwide... their "Single IP Innovation" is Round Robin
with heartbeat monitors (real innovation there :/).
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
