[stunnel-users] New feature
uffe at vedenbrant.se
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
> 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!
More information about the stunnel-users