I'm talking about distributed hosting on virtual computers. I'm not talking about sharing webroots among the "emergency network", I'm talking about a vmware/virtualpc image that participants just fire up when needed. talk about a standard (well, if there's such thing) 3 tier website: www, application, database. the database can be anywhere, since users don't connect to it. application servers can then be distributed. webservers of course can be distributed. VPN would transmit data among these servers. a good contract system can solve the privacy issues. Again, I'm not talking about everyone hosting these images: I'm talking about guys like tier1 providers, akamai solutions and such. I have about 60 servers in two tier one locations, and in the long term, I'm worried about ddos. but I would be happy to dedicate one or more servers for this network, and if an alliance of such was formed, our management would sure be willing to have an "insurance" like this, at 5 grand a year or so. Again, I can't answer the specific questions, but I'm certain it could be done and could be done well. International - well, again, the database doesn't need to leave the country. web and application could tho...
I think it's time for the sensible businesses to form an alliance to defend themselves from these DDOS attacks. We've got to be able to switch along storage, location, share the load among us. If there was a few dozen or hundred larger sites with huge pipes, then actions like this could be avoided. Virtualization looks like a very good help for this. Send along a vmware image to the emergency network, fire up the systems, vpn to the backend, and you're set. I know I oversimplify this, but I guess something along these lines could work (technically). Of course politics and such come into play, but if major players started to float this idea - again, I think it could work. Any thoughts (or flames)?
the pentium brand is only meaningful in PCs. they couldn't benefit from it in PDAs, phones and potentially other devices. if they standardize, like the D, X (scale, in PDAs), etc, it can be taken to the new, "global" level, without having to separate by product type.
This just goes to show that these two continents belong to each other, and neither could exist without the other. After all, the USA, as we know it today, was built by expat Europeans.
The above doesn't mean that I would support today's administration of the US or that I would want to live there. I haven't been there since 2000. Until they change the current border entry systems, I won't be back either.
Having lots of friends there, it's not an easy thing to do.
- an European
Depends on who you are. When you are an ISP, it's probably the other way around - somebody's got to pay for the bandwidth, after all. And while you can distribute that cost among "light users", I for one sure wouldn't like to pay for others' downloads.
I see a perfect sense in this service. You get screaming bandwidth, for - say - limited use. You can get less bandwidth (from other providers) for unlimited use. Your choice. With my usage habits, I download about 50-60 gigs a month. For a guy like me, an 8Mbps/500GB service would be ideal.
I don't think they could charge for it. They are always keen to repeat that hotfixes are free (as beer) for Windows. And since this stuff sounds like a placeholder until the next hotfix arrives...
Slashdot Mirror
I'm talking about distributed hosting on virtual computers. I'm not talking about sharing webroots among the "emergency network", I'm talking about a vmware/virtualpc image that participants just fire up when needed. talk about a standard (well, if there's such thing) 3 tier website: www, application, database. the database can be anywhere, since users don't connect to it. application servers can then be distributed. webservers of course can be distributed. VPN would transmit data among these servers. a good contract system can solve the privacy issues. Again, I'm not talking about everyone hosting these images: I'm talking about guys like tier1 providers, akamai solutions and such. I have about 60 servers in two tier one locations, and in the long term, I'm worried about ddos. but I would be happy to dedicate one or more servers for this network, and if an alliance of such was formed, our management would sure be willing to have an "insurance" like this, at 5 grand a year or so. Again, I can't answer the specific questions, but I'm certain it could be done and could be done well. International - well, again, the database doesn't need to leave the country. web and application could tho...
I think it's time for the sensible businesses to form an alliance to defend themselves from these DDOS attacks. We've got to be able to switch along storage, location, share the load among us. If there was a few dozen or hundred larger sites with huge pipes, then actions like this could be avoided. Virtualization looks like a very good help for this. Send along a vmware image to the emergency network, fire up the systems, vpn to the backend, and you're set. I know I oversimplify this, but I guess something along these lines could work (technically). Of course politics and such come into play, but if major players started to float this idea - again, I think it could work. Any thoughts (or flames)?
the pentium brand is only meaningful in PCs. they couldn't benefit from it in PDAs, phones and potentially other devices. if they standardize, like the D, X (scale, in PDAs), etc, it can be taken to the new, "global" level, without having to separate by product type.
my $0.02
This just goes to show that these two continents belong to each other, and neither could exist without the other. After all, the USA, as we know it today, was built by expat Europeans. The above doesn't mean that I would support today's administration of the US or that I would want to live there. I haven't been there since 2000. Until they change the current border entry systems, I won't be back either. Having lots of friends there, it's not an easy thing to do. - an European
Depends on who you are. When you are an ISP, it's probably the other way around - somebody's got to pay for the bandwidth, after all. And while you can distribute that cost among "light users", I for one sure wouldn't like to pay for others' downloads. I see a perfect sense in this service. You get screaming bandwidth, for - say - limited use. You can get less bandwidth (from other providers) for unlimited use. Your choice. With my usage habits, I download about 50-60 gigs a month. For a guy like me, an 8Mbps/500GB service would be ideal.
I don't think they could charge for it. They are always keen to repeat that hotfixes are free (as beer) for Windows. And since this stuff sounds like a placeholder until the next hotfix arrives...