User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

TCP connection hijacking and parasites - as a good thing

TCP connection hijacking and parasites - as a good thing

Posted Aug 13, 2011 22:48 UTC (Sat) by dlang (subscriber, #313)
In reply to: TCP connection hijacking and parasites - as a good thing by raven667
Parent article: TCP connection hijacking and parasites - as a good thing

the 'correct' answer (and what competing products do) is to have multiple servers, and have the data replicated to all the servers.

it's fairly common (although complex) at the application level to implement updates of small amounts of information across a geographically distributed cluster of machines (lookup two phase commit). but if you rely on the entire VM state being synced, there is just too much unnecessary data involved to keep things synced in real time.


(Log in to post comments)

TCP connection hijacking and parasites - as a good thing

Posted Aug 15, 2011 21:00 UTC (Mon) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]

One thing I thought of when mentally designing a system as you described is that you would both need to have complete history but also a large window of near-future passwords. If you restore a host from last year, you need to be able to log into it and if you restore last week's backup of your password management system it needs to know what the current passwords would be otherwise you have no DR, just HA.

TCP connection hijacking and parasites - as a good thing

Posted Aug 16, 2011 0:09 UTC (Tue) by dlang (subscriber, #313) [Link]

yes, you do need to have a record of the historic passwords as well.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds