Joseph Mack NA3T wrote: > realserver is an LVS term referring to the machine/node(s) > that are being loadbalanced by the director. > > I've never liked the LVS nomenclature; e.g. "virtual", > "realserver", but since I couldn't come up with an > alternative and no-one else seemed to mind, I've just > accepted it. We haven't had too much problems with the word > "virtual" since we haven't run into other projects using the > term much. However if realservers are going to be > virtualised, there's going to be lots of name space > collisions. > > Joe, I can see the term 'realserver' becoming a problem. A lot of people are going to think this is real hardware when it's not limited to just real hardware. I think a better term might be 'actual server' or 'runserver' or 'destination server' or 'target server' or anything that doesn't use real/virtual. The virtualization world is pretty much defining the meaning of real/virtual. The LVS world needs to adopt some other language to describe where the target service lives.
Gerry _______________________________________________ LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org Send requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
