On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 12:29 +1300, Nathan Ward wrote:

>
> Seems to me some people don't think through the logical  
> consequences of
> their actions.  It also seems to me that anyone needing failover in  
> less
> than about an hour wants a different solution than updating DNS  
> entries
> (load balancer, anycast, etc).

These solutions are about failover between sites where anycast is (a)  
not possible because of lack of BGP,

I wonder how many sites that serve "big content" and are concerned about loadsharing are not BGP connected. Not many I suspect.

 or (b) a concern for connection  
oriented protocols (TCP).

Correct me if I'm wrong but this is only a concern under a failure mode of an anycast node? So combined with probability of risk and ease of resolution (browser reload), is this really a big concern?

jamie