Getting a web page from filePro

[Brian K. White]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fairlight" <fairlite at fairlite.com>
To: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: Getting a web page from filePro


> The honourable and venerable Walter Vaughan spoke thus:
>> Bill Vermillion wrote:
>>
>> > The chances of them moving this site are more remote than the very
>> > real possibility of UPS using round-robin DNS to lighten/spread
>> > the load among many machines.
>>
>> That ip address has been up since the begining (97-8?). At one time we
>
> And could change any minute.  The machine could fall over dead.  They 
> could
> redo their topography.  You're not -getting it-, Walter.  Frankly, I'd 
> have
> expected more ready understanding from you.
>
>> migrated to something that used the DNS and all those cgi variables
>> figuring that it would be the "right" thing to do. After the *second*
>> time they changed how it worked, we've gone back to the orignal (and
>> still supported this minute) method.
>
> And if/when they pull it, you'll be screwed.  You were warned.  Archive it
> so we never have to say we told you so.  :)
>
> YMMV as well, but I still think it's poor practise not to follow their
> specifications to the fullest degree possible.  Eventually it bites you.


I think he gets it fine, He just doesn't agree with you (or me) about how
important it is.
He's weighing the observed & potential harm and the observed & potential
gain and weighs the various factors differently than you and comes up with a
different final answer. Nothing wrong with that. If the IP stops working he
knows he'll have to log into a bunch of customers and update it. Maybe the
"it just works" goodness now, outweighs the small (perceived) chance of
that.

Even then, If they impliment a round robin load balance, there is some
chance this IP will still work for at least a couple reasons. Maybe the load
balancer can listen on all the known ip's and dns names in use at the time
they install it, and transparently send the transaction to some internal
box. Maybe they _already_ do that. Maybe if the load balancer is not too
sophisticated it's possible to continue accessing one of the boxes in the
pool directly by it's IP, thus walking right by the load balancer. This
would not be polite but it would work (again, IF the balancer is simple).

Myself, I would still try to use the dns name and whatever official method
of access they push. If they need a load balancer or a new cgi and you don't
use it, you are helping make the net a bad place for everyone else. Only a
tiny bit, but everyone's tiny bit of good or bad behaviour adds up the the
world being a good or bad place.

Brian K. White  --  brian at aljex.com  --  http://www.aljex.com/bkw/
+++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
filePro BBx  Linux SCO  Prosper/FACTS AutoCAD  #callahans Satriani