Let the load balancer pass SSL/TLS-encrypted data through to the servers. I wonder how a hanshake is processed if a new HTTPS connection to a client is established: Handshaking is a stateful communication. For instance, in order to verify the client's finished message, the server needs to know all handshake messages that has been exchanged between server (farm) and client so far. Hence, - as far as I can see - there are three possibilities:    SSL/TLS data are hold in a cache that is shared by all servers  The content of the handshake messages is replicated to all servers.  The load balancer directs all handshake messages from the client to the same server.    Question: Which scenario is typically used in such an environment ? Are there further policies in handling handshakes that I missed ?     Added: I'm faced with the claim that my question is a duplicate and I'm told to edit my question in order to explain why it is different from . So here is my comparison between my question and the other question:    a) I figured out three options to handle https state in an load balancing environment and asked which of these (or maybe other ones) are used in practise.   b) In the other question the OP uses option 3 ("same server"), i.e. all requests  with same IP are routed to the same server. However, since most of their clients use the same IP lb doesn't work well and OP asks for a way out. Four and a half out of five answers give suggestions that, in effect, keep option 3 above. One part of an answer there ("DNS for target server"), I didn't understand.   So the question is still, if the options 1 ("ssl cache") and 2 ("replication of ssl hanshake data") are in used in practise. The article  seems to favor option 1 (see "4. Dedicated SSL-Cache Farm").
I am faced with the following problem: Servers get saturated since current load balancing strategy is based on client IP. Some corporate clients access our servers from behind large proxies so all clients appear with same IP to our load balancer. I think we are using some hardware load balancing device (can investigate further if necessary). We need to maintain session affinity (site is constructed in ASP), so all requests with same IP get routed to the same node.  Since all the communication goes over the HTTPS, no request data (like session Id) is available to balancer as a client discriminator. Is there a way to use some other data besides the IP to distinguish between clients and route the clients even when coming from same IP to different nodes?  Note: I need to maintain the traffic between the balancer and nodes safe (encrypted).
Is it possible to produce such design hints (on elements padding, spacing, width, height) automatically in photoshop? Is there any plugin that can potentially do this? How to understand linux versioning I need to understand the Linux versioning system and distribution concepts. what are public, stable or final terms for versions? "Back" and "Install Now" buttons grayed out in 14.04 installer The "Back" and "Install Now" buttons are grayed out in the 14.04 installer. How do I restore them? Generating random integer from a range Server only reachable over VPN I have an Apache server running on a Raspberry P and it works just fine in the local network. And after forwarding port 80 and trying to connect using the public IP, Chrome says ERR_CONNECTION_REFUSED. But the strange thing is that I CAN reach the server when using VPN and using the same IP. What can I do?     -telnet 80.***.***.78 80      Trying 80.***.***.78...     telnet: connect to address 80.***.***.78: Connection refused     telnet: Unable to connect to remote host     -route -n      Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface     0.0.0.0         192.168.0.1     0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 eth0     192.168.0.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 eth0      -sudo netstat -lapute:              Active Internet connections (servers and established)     Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address           Foreign Address         State       User       Inode       PID/Program name     tcp        0      0 *:http                  *:*                     LISTEN      root       6137        2051/apache2     tcp        0      0 *:ssh                   *:*                     LISTEN      root       6367        2249/sshd     tcp        0      0 pi.local:ssh            nmb.local:65535         ESTABLISHED root       8669        2565/sshd: pi [priv     udp        0      0 *:9949                  *:*                                 root       5918        1809/dhclient     udp        0      0 *:mdns                  *:*                                 avahi      6293        2184/avahi-daemon:     udp        0      0 *:54070                 *:*                                 avahi      6295        2184/avahi-daemon:     udp        0      0 *:bootpc                *:*                                 root       5946        1809/dhclient     udp        0      0 pi.local:ntp            *:*                                 root       6310        2200/ntpd     udp        0      0 localhost:ntp           *:*                                 root       6309        2200/ntpd     udp        0      0 *:ntp                   *:*                                 root       6304        2200/ntpd Removal of statistically significant intercept term increases $R^2$ in linear model I have been attending a number of academic / professional conferences recently and one thing that really awed me was the flawless and natural way in which the speakers presented on their topics.  Sure, they had the occasional mispronunciations or awkward pauses but they spoke with authority and confidence.   Some of them used powerpoint slides but were not reading from the slides; they were just talking on the points and they had so much to say on each point that I felt they could not do it without notes, but they were not even looking at their notes most of the time.  (The advantages of not looking at their notes too much was that they could maintain eye contact and could use very interesting slides that were not crammed with the dot points of their speeches.)  I hate to think that they had memorised their speech notes but some of the presentations went for more than an hour.  I know rehearsal is important but I wonder how could anyone remember so much in a nervous situation. (Its one thing to know everything on your topic; its another thing to present that 'everything'!)  Question:  What background / foreground things do presenters do that make their presentations flawless and natural? I am trying to put in a switch and a light it controls in a storage building and  is how I wired it.   Click for larger view  When I checked the wiring it registered 120V when the switch was on, and right around 50V when the switch was off.  Why would power still be getting to the light (I'm guessing there is a problem with the switch) and why would it only be 50V?  Oh, and where everything branches off at the beginning I have a junction box there where all of the wires are joined there. Async Await Handler Deadlock Do any queries exist that require RIGHT JOIN, or can they always be re-written with LEFT JOIN?  And more specifically, how do you re-write this one without the right join (and I guess implicitly without any subqueries or other fanciness):   SELECT * FROM t1 LEFT JOIN t2 ON t1.k2 = t2.k2 RIGHT JOIN t3 ON t3.k3 = t2.k3 Why don't we feel the subtle speed change of Earth's elliptical orbit? Earth's orbit is a slight ellipse, so to conserve momentum its speed increases when it is closest to the Sun. If the speed changes there is an acceleration. If there is an acceleration there is a force. Even if the change is small and gradual, wouldn't we experience a force because the Earth is so massive? Among other sources,  states that triple DES using three seperate keys (k1, k2, k3) is vulnerable to meet-in-the-middle-attacks, while triple DES using only two keys (k1, k2, k1) is not.  Why is this attack possible if all the keys are different, but not if the first and the third are the same? I'm trying to prove that for $p,q&gt;0$, we have $$\int_0^1t^{p-1}(1-t)^{q-1}\,dt=\frac{\Gamma(p)\Gamma(q)}{\Gamma(p+q)}.$$    The hint given suggests that we express $\Gamma(p)\Gamma(q)$ as a double integral, then do a change of variables, but I've been unable thus far to express it as a double integral.  Can anyone get me started or suggest an alternate approach?  Note: This wasn't actually given to me as the $\Gamma$ function, just as a function $f$ satisfying $$f(p)=\int_0^\infty e^{-t}t^{p-1}\,dt$$ for all $p&gt;0$, but I recognized that. This is in the context of an advanced calculus practice exam. Is a 2-hour transit time enough to catch a connecting flight in Muscat airport? Both flights are with Oman Air I am flying from Dubai to India with Oman Air with a layover of 2 hours at Muscat airport. Is 2 hours enough for me to catch my connecting flight from Muscat to New Delhi? My flight from Dubai to Muscat as well as the connecting flight from Muscat to New Delhi are with Oman Air. Do I need to re-check in my luggage? Am I taking a risk or should I take an earlier flight from Dubai to get more layover time to be on the safer side? I would like to align the view straight on to a face, perpendicular to the normal. How do I align the 3D viewport to the face of a mesh? Double dual mappings $\newcommand{\Hom}{\operatorname{Hom}}$Let $U,V$ be vector spaces. Denote the dual space of $U$ with $U^\intercal$ and the dual mapping of a linear map $\Phi$ be $\Phi^\intercal$. Define the double dual embedding on $U$ to be $\iota_U:U \to U^{\intercal\intercal}$. ($u \in U, f \in U^\intercal$) $$ \iota_U(u)(f) = f(u) $$     If $\Phi \in \Hom(V,U)$, then $\Phi^{\intercal\intercal} \circ \iota_V = \iota_U \circ \Phi:V \to U^{\intercal\intercal}$   Proof: Let $v \in V, f \in U^\intercal$. Then $$ \iota_U \circ \Phi(v)(f) = f(\Phi(v)) $$ but how do I show that $$ \Phi^{\intercal\intercal} \circ \iota_V(v)(f) = f(\Phi(v)) $$ ? What does an ampersand after this assignment operator mean? Is a memory leak created if a MemoryStream in .NET is not closed? I have the following code:  MemoryStream foo(){     MemoryStream ms = new MemoryStream();     // write stuff to ms     return ms; }  void bar(){     MemoryStream ms2 = foo();     // do stuff with ms2     return; }   Is there any chance that the MemoryStream that I've allocated will somehow fail to be disposed of later?    I've got a peer review insisting that I manually close this, and I can't find the information to tell if he has a valid point or not. Prove : $p$(n│even number of ODD parts)=$p$(n│distinct parts ,number of ODD parts is even ) Should we pass a shared_ptr by reference or by value?