<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Amazon Releases Load Balancing</title> <atom:link href="http://sevans.info/2009/05/18/amazon-releases-load-balancing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://sevans.info/2009/05/18/amazon-releases-load-balancing/</link> <description>Technical Speaker, IT Pro, Microsoft MVP, and Father.</description> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:22:07 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Amazon Elastic Load Balancer Setup &#124; Serk</title><link>http://sevans.info/2009/05/18/amazon-releases-load-balancing/comment-page-1/#comment-456</link> <dc:creator>Amazon Elastic Load Balancer Setup &#124; Serk</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 16:36:19 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://sevans.info/2009/05/18/amazon-releases-load-balancing/#comment-456</guid> <description>[...] Amazon Releases Load Balancing  [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Amazon Releases Load Balancing  [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Steve</title><link>http://sevans.info/2009/05/18/amazon-releases-load-balancing/comment-page-1/#comment-454</link> <dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2009 04:45:45 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://sevans.info/2009/05/18/amazon-releases-load-balancing/#comment-454</guid> <description>Assuming Amazons Load Balancer is stable and performs well I&#039;d make some back of the napkin estimates that it might make sense to move the SSL termination to the web server nodes.  Obviously there&#039;s a lot of if&#039;s in there.  It will be interesting to see how things play out.
I think it&#039;s a lot more interesting for IIS farms to avoid having to introduce a different OS to do the load balancing.
Cloud Watch looks very promising and very expensive.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Assuming Amazons Load Balancer is stable and performs well I&#8217;d make some back of the napkin estimates that it might make sense to move the SSL termination to the web server nodes.  Obviously there&#8217;s a lot of if&#8217;s in there.  It will be interesting to see how things play out.</p><p>I think it&#8217;s a lot more interesting for IIS farms to avoid having to introduce a different OS to do the load balancing.</p><p>Cloud Watch looks very promising and very expensive.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Kyle Wiens</title><link>http://sevans.info/2009/05/18/amazon-releases-load-balancing/comment-page-1/#comment-453</link> <dc:creator>Kyle Wiens</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2009 03:55:42 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://sevans.info/2009/05/18/amazon-releases-load-balancing/#comment-453</guid> <description>You&#039;re right about the LB being a lot cheaper. Unfortunately it&#039;s pretty limited, and will require some backend work to get it doing things like SSL termination properly. I think we&#039;ll still have to use it in combination with HAProxy.
CloudWatch is also looking promising, although it&#039;s a 15% premium on a small instance.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re right about the LB being a lot cheaper. Unfortunately it&#8217;s pretty limited, and will require some backend work to get it doing things like SSL termination properly. I think we&#8217;ll still have to use it in combination with HAProxy.</p><p>CloudWatch is also looking promising, although it&#8217;s a 15% premium on a small instance.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
