From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jun 30 01:42:08 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id BAA25107 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Jun 1995 01:42:08 -0700 Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id BAA25100 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 1995 01:42:04 -0700 Received: from msmith@localhost by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id SAA24679; Fri, 30 Jun 1995 18:13:27 +0930 From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199506300843.SAA24679@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: Load Balancing/Sharing w/ FreeBSD To: tom@sdf.com (Tom Samplonius) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 1995 18:13:26 +0930 (CST) Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, nc@ai.net, hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Tom Samplonius" at Jun 29, 95 07:05:16 pm Content-Type: text Content-Length: 998 Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Tom Samplonius stands accused of saying: > > - Not using a modem server in the original scenario is Just Plain Stupid; > > if you have a set of servers that are likely to be so loaded > > that you don't want logins to them, putting modems on them is a > > Really Bad Idea. > > I was refering to telnet/rlogin access from other hosts. I would > hardly call that "Stupid". IIRC, the "original scenario" involved dialin lines; hence the qualification. One could, triviallly, use a telnet server in the same situation. It's suboptimal, but allows things to work without modifying any remote clients. > Tom -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] My car has "demand start" - Terry Lambert [[