W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: [gears-eng] Re: [google-gears-eng] Re: Deploying new expectation-extensions

From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:07:40 +0100
To: Brian McBarron <bpm@google.com>
Cc: gears-eng@googlegroups.com, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>, Charles Fry <fry@google.com>, Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20080916160740.GB4275@shareable.org>

Brian McBarron wrote:
>      These aren't a problem, as long as the front-end redirector is able
>      to select targets according to the Resumable-POST Etag as well as the
>      URL.
> 
> Requiring a header-inspecting load balancer and/or implementing a
> multi-layer serving architecture seems like a steep cost to get into
> this protocol.  Especially when explicit URI redirection would solve
> the issue for no added cost.

There is a cost, because you may have to change your infrastructure to
support URLs directly addressing individual servers within a cluster,
and you have to add a different kind of load-balancing to handle when
individual servers are taken down in the cluster so another server can
take over those URLs for the clients still using them.

But I agree that you might be able to use existing URL-based front-end
load-balancing kit, and that might reduce the cost of implementation
substantially.

-- Jamie
Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2008 16:08:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:54 GMT