[stunnel-users] New feature

Fri Oct 15 16:17:34 CEST 2004

> SqM wrote:
>
>> I assume that in the case of "bad remote host" the client will select
>> the next configured server..
>
> If "bad remote host" means that connect() has failed - yes.
>
>> That would actually be perfect for both simple load-sharing and a
>> very simple solution to handle broken remote stunnel servers..
>
> Right.  So you gain both: performance and reliability.
>
>> For loadsharing it could be interesting to have the initially
>> selected server in the list chosen randomly if possible..
>
> You mean that each client makes its first connection to the same host,
> right?  You could randomize the order of "connect" options in
> configuration
> files distributed to clients.
>

Yep.. But.. I would preffer to have the same config on all clients.

But still.. This function sounds great and
will at least help me!

/Uffe