Monday, February 20, 2017

What to Expect in 2017: Mobile Device Security

We are mobile, our devices are mobile, the networks we connect to are mobile and the applications we access are mobile. Mobility, in all its iterations, is a huge enabler and concern for enterprises and it'll only get worse as we start wearing our connected clothing to the office.

If the last 10 years wasn’t warning enough, 2017 will be a huge year for mobile…again. Every year, it seems, new security opportunities, challenges and questions surround the mobile landscape. And now it encompasses more than just the device that causes phantom vibration syndrome, it now involves the dizzying array of sensors, devices and automatons in our households, offices and municipalities. Mobile has infiltrated our society and our bodies along with it.

So the security stakes are high.

The more we become one with our mobile devices, the more they become targets. It holds our most precious secrets which can be very valuable. We need to use care when operating such a device since, in many ways, our lives depend on it. And with the increased automation, digitization and data gathering, there are always security concerns.

So how do we stay safe?

The consumerization of IT technologies has made us all administrators of our personal infrastructure of connected devices. Our digital self has become a life of its own. As individuals we need to stay vigilant about clicking suspicious links, updating software, changing passwords, backing up data, watching financial accounts, having AV/FW and generally locking down devices like we do the doors to our home. Even then, the smartphone enabled deadbolt can be a risk. And we haven’t even touched on mobile payment systems, IoT botnets or the untested, insecure apps on the mobile phone itself.

Cybersecurity is a social issue that impacts us all and we all need to be accountable.

For enterprises, mobile devices carry an increased risk, especially personal devices connecting to an internal network. From regulatory compliance to the disgruntled employee, keeping sensitive information secret is top concern. BYOD policies and MDM solutions help as does segmenting those devices away from critical info. And the issue isn’t so much seeing restricted information, especially if your job requires it, it is more about unauthorized access if the device is compromised or lost. Many organizations have policies in place to combat this, including a total device wipe…which may also blast your personal keepsakes. The endpoint security market is maturing but won’t fill the ever-present security gaps.

From your workforce to your customers, your mobile web applications are also a target. The Anti-Phishing Working Group (APWG) reports a 250 percent jump in the number of detected phishing websites between October 2015 and March 2016. Around 230,000 unique phishing campaigns a month, many aimed at mobile devices arriving as worrisome text messages. Late 2016 saw mobile browsing overtake desktop for the first time and Google now favors mobile-friendly websites for its mobile search results. A double compatibility and SEO whammy.

And those two might not be the biggest risk to an organization since weakest link in the security ecosystem might be third-party vendors and suppliers.

On the industrial side, tractors, weather sensors, street lights, HVAC systems, your car and other critical infrastructure are now mobile devices with their own unique security implications. The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) focuses on industrial control systems, device to network access and all the other connective sensor capabilities. These attacks are less frequent, at least today, but the consequences can be huge – taking out industrial plants, buildings, farms, and even entire cities.

The Digital Dress Code has emerged and with 5G on the way, mobile device security takes on a whole new meaning.



Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Shared Authentication Domains on BIG-IP APM

How to share an APM session across multiple access profiles.

A common question for someone new to BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is how do I configure BIG-IP APM so the user only logs in once.

By default, BIG-IP APM requires authentication for each access profile.

This can easily be changed by sending the domain cookie variable is the access profile’s SSO authentication domain menu.

Let’s walk through how to configure App1 and App2 to only require authentication once.

We’ll start with App1’s Access Profile.

Once you click through to App1’s settings, in the Top menu, select SSO/Auth Domains.

For the Domain Cookie, we’ll set the value to since App1 and App2 use this domain and it is a FQDN. Of course, click Update.

Next, we’ll select App2’s Access Profile. Like App1, we select SSO/Auth Domains and set the Domain Cookie value to

To make sure it works, we’ll launch App1 in our browser.

We’re prompted for authentication and enter our credentials and luckily, we have a successful login.

And then we’ll try to login to App2. And when we click it, we’re not prompted again for authentication information and gain access without prompts.

Granted this was a single login request for two simple applications but it can be scaled for hundreds of applications. If you‘d like to see a working demo of this, check it out here.


Wednesday, February 8, 2017

Lightboard Lessons: IoT on BIG-IP

As more organizations deploy IoT applications in their data centers and clouds, they're going to need their ADC to understand the unique protocols these devices use to communicate.

In this Lightboard Lesson, I light up how IoT protocol MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport) works on BIG-IP v13. iRules allow you to do Topic based load balancing along with sensor authentication. And if you missed it, here is the #LBL on What is MQTT?



Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Security Trends in 2016: Securing the Internet of Things

Whenever you connect anything to the internet, there is risk involved. Just ask the millions of IoT zombies infected with Mirai. Sure, there have been various stories over the years about hacking thermostats, refrigerators, cameras, pacemakers, insulin pumps and other medical devices along with cars, homes and hotel rooms…but Mirai took it to a new level.

And it’s not the only IoT botnet out there nor are these nasty botnets going away anytime soon. There’s a gold mine of unprotected devices out there waiting to either have their/your info stolen or be used to flood another website with traffic.

This is bound to compound in the years to come.

A recent Ponemon Institute report noted that an incredible 80% of IoT applications are not tested for vulnerabilities. Let’s try that again – only 20% of the IoT applications that we use daily are tested for vulnerabilities. There’s probably no indication or guarantee that the one you are using now has been tested.

Clearly a trend we saw in 2016, and seems to continue into 2017, is that people are focusing too much on the ‘things’ themselves and the coolness factor rather than the fact that anytime you connect something to the internet, you are potentially exposing yourself to thieves. There has been such a rush to get products to market and make some money off a new trend yet these same companies ignore or simply do not understand the potential security threats. This somewhat mimics the early days of internet connectivity when insecure PCs dialed up and were instantly inundated with worms, viruses and email spam. AV/FW software soon came along and intended to reduce those threats.

Today it’s a bit different but the cycle continues.

Back then you’d probably notice that your computer was acting funky, slowing down or malfunctioning since we interacted with it daily. Today, we typically do not spend every waking hour working with our IoT devices. They’re meant to function independently to grab data, make adjustments and alert us on a mobile app with limited human interaction. That’s the ‘smart’ part everyone talks about. But these botnets are smart themselves. With that, you may never know that your DVR is infected and allowing someone across the globe (or waiting at the nearest street corner) watch your every move.

Typical precautions we usually hear are actions like changing default passwords, not connecting it directly to the internet and updating the firmware to reduce the exposure. Software developers, too, need to plan and build in security from the onset rather than an afterthought. The security vs. usability conundrum that plagues many web applications extends to IoT applications also. But you wouldn’t, or I should say, shouldn’t deploy a financial application without properly testing it for vulnerabilities. There the risk is financial loss but with IoT and particularly medical/health devices the result can be deadly.

Mirai was just the beginning of the next wave of vulnerability exploitation. More chaos to come.



Thursday, February 2, 2017

What is DNS?

What is the Domain Name System (DNS)?

Imagine how difficult it would be to use the Internet if you had to remember dozens of number combinations to do anything. The Domain Name System (DNS) was created in 1983 to enable humans to easily identify all the computers, services, and resources connected to the Internet by name—instead of by Internet Protocol (IP) address, an increasingly difficult-to-memorize string of information. Think of all the website domain names you know off the top of your head and how hard it would be to memorize specific IP addresses for all those domain names. Think of DNS as the Internet's phone book. A DNS server translates the domain names you type into a browser, like, into an IP address (, which allows your device to find the resource you're looking for on the Internet.

DNS is a hierarchical distributed naming system for computers, services, or other resources connected to the Internet. It associates various information with domain names that are assigned to each of the participating DNS entries.

How DNS Works

The user types the address of the site ( as an example) into the web browser. The browser has no clue where is, so it sends a request to the Local DNS Server (LDNS) to ask if it has a record for If the LDNS does not have a record for that particular site, it begins a recursive search of the Internet domains to find out who owns

First, the LDNS contacts one of the Root DNS Servers, and the Root Server responds by telling the LDNS to contact the .com DNS Server. The LDNS then asks the .com DNS Server if it has a record for, and the .com DNS Server determines the owner of and returns a Name Server (NS) record for Check out the diagram below:

Next, the LDNS queries the DNS Server NS record. The DNS Server looks up the name: If it finds the name, it returns an Address (A) record to the LDNS. The A record contains the name, IP address, and Time to Live (TTL). The TTL (measured in seconds) tells the LDNS how long to maintain the A record before it asks the DNS Server again.

When the LDNS receives the A record, it caches the IP address for the time specified in the TTL. Now that the LDNS had the A record for, it can answer future requests from its own cache rather than completing the entire recursive search again. LDNS returns the IP address of to the host computer, and the local browser caches the IP address on the computer for the time specified in the TTL. After all, if it can hold on to the info locally, it won't need to keep asking the LDNS.

The browser then uses the IP address to open a connection to and sends a GET /... and the web server returns the web page response.

DNS can get a lot more complicated than what this simple example shows, but this gives you an idea of how it works.

DNS Importance

As arguably the primary technology enabling the Internet, DNS is also one of the most important components in networking infrastructure. In addition to delivering content and applications, DNS also manages a distributed and redundant architecture to ensure high availability and quality user response time—so it is critical to have an available, intelligent, secure, and scalable DNS infrastructure. If DNS fails, most web applications will fail to function properly. And DNS is a prime target for attack.

The importance of a strong DNS foundation cannot be overstated. Without one, your customers may not be able to access your content and applications when they want to—and if they can't get what they want from you, they'll likely turn elsewhere.

Growing Pains

DNS is growing especially with mobile apps and IoT devices requiring name resolution.  Add to that, organizations are experiencing rapid growth in terms of applications as well as the volume of traffic accessing those applications.

In the last five years, the volume of DNS queries on for .com and .net addresses has more than doubled. More than 10 million domain names were added to the Internet in 2016 and future growth is expected to occur at an even faster pace as more cloud, mobile and IoT implementations are deployed.

Security Issues

If DNS is the backbone of the Internet—answering all the queries and resolving all the numbers so you can find your favorite sites—it is also one of the most vulnerable points in your network. Due to the crucial role it plays, DNS is a high-value security target. DNS DDoS attacks can flood your DNS servers to the point of failure or hijack the request and redirect requests to a malicious server. To prevent this, a distributed high-performing, secure DNS architecture and DNS offload capabilities must be integrated into the network.

Generally, DNS servers and DNS cloud services can handle varying amounts of requests per second with the costs increasing as the queries-per-second increase.

To address DNS surges and DNS DDoS attacks, companies add more DNS servers, which are not really needed during normal business operations. This costly solution also often requires manual intervention for changes. In addition, traditional DNS servers require frequent maintenance and patching, primarily for new vulnerabilities.

The Traditional Solution

When looking for DNS solutions, many organizations select BIND (Berkeley Internet Naming Daemon), the Internet's original DNS resolver. Installed on approximately 80 percent of the world's DNS servers, BIND is an open-source project maintained by Internet Systems Consortium (ISC).

Despite its popularity, BIND requires significant maintenance multiple times a year primarily due to vulnerabilities, patches, and upgrades. It can be downloaded freely, but needs servers (an additional cost, including support contracts) and an operating system. In addition, BIND typically scales to only 50,000 responses per second (RPS), making it vulnerable to both legitimate and malicious DNS surges.

Next Step

If you're ready to learn more or dig deeper into DNS, check out these more advanced articles
  • DNS - DevCentral Wiki
  • Application Layer DNS Firewall
  • Lightboard Lessons: DNS Scalability & Security
  • DNS Express and Zone Transfers

  • DNS Does the Job

  • Tuesday, January 31, 2017

    Q/A with itacs GmbH's Kai Wilke - DevCentral's Featured Member for February

    Kai Wilke is a Principal Consultant for IT Security at itacs GmbH – a German consulting company located in Berlin City specializing in Microsoft security solutions, SharePoint deployments, and customizations as well as classical IT Consulting. He is also a 2017 DevCentral MVP and DevCentral’s Featured Member for February!

    For almost 20 years in IT, he’s constantly explored the evens and odds of various technologies, including different operating systems, SSO and authentication services, RBAC models, PKI and cryptography components, HTTP-based services, proxy servers, firewalls, and core networking components. His focus in these areas has always been security related and included the design, implementation and review of secure and high availability/high performance datacenters.

    DevCentral got a chance to talk with Kai about his work, life and mastery of iRules.

    DevCentral: You’ve been a very active contributor to the DevCentral community and wondered what keeps you involved?
    Kai: Working with online communities has always been an important thing for me and it began long time ago within the good old Usenet and the predecessor of the Darknet. Before joining the F5 community, I was also once an honored member of the Microsoft Online Community and was five times awarded as a Microsoft MVP for Enterprise Security and Microsoft-related firewall/proxy server technologies. 
    My opinion is that if you want to become an expert for a certain technology or product, you should not just learn THE-ONE straight-forward method fetched from manuals, guides or even exams. Instead, you have to dive deeply into all of those edge scenarios and learn all the uncountable ways to mess the things up. And dealing with questions and problems of other peers is probably the best catalyst to gain that kind of experience. 
    Besides of that, the quality of the DevCentral content and the knowledge of other community members are absolutely astonishing. It makes simply a lot of fun for me to work within the DevCentral community and to learn every day a little bit more…
    DC: Tell us a little about the areas of BIG-IP expertise you have.
    KW: Over the years, I successfully implemented BIG-IP LTM, APM, ASM, and DNS Service deployments for our customers. Technologically, I internalized TMOS and its architecture very well and I pretty much learned how to write simple but also somewhat complex iRules to control the delivery of arbitrary data on their way from A to B in any possible fashion.
    DC: You are a Principal Consultant for IT Security at itacs GmbH - a German consulting company. Can you describe your typical workday?
    KW: Because of my history with Microsoft related infrastructures, my current workload is pretty versatile.
    Many of my current projects are still settled in the Microsoft / Windows system environment and are covering the design and review of security related areas. Right now, I’m working with several DAX companies and also LaaS, PaaS and SaaS service providers to analyze their Active Directory and System Management infrastructures and to design and implement a very unique, fundamental and comprehensive security concept to counter those dreaded PtH (Pass-the-Hash) and APT (Advance Persistent Threat) attacks we are facing these days. 
    Over the last years, my F5 customer base has periodically grown so I would say my work is a 50:50 mix right now. I do F5 workshops, designs, implementations, second and third level support as well as configuration reviews and optimization of existing environments. I work with some big web 2.0 customers that have the demand to pretty much exhaust all the capabilities of an F5. This challenges me as a network architect and as an ADC developer. 
    I realize every day that working with F5 products makes so much more fun than any Microsoft product I have ever dealt with. So in the future, I will even more put my focus on F5!
    DC: Describe one of your biggest BIG-IP challenges and how DevCentral helped in that situation.
    KW: In my opinion, the F5 products themselves are not that challenging – but sometimes the underlying technologies and the detailed project requirements are. But as long as those requirements can be drawn and explained on a sheet of paper, I am somewhat confident that the BIG-IP platform is able to support the requirements – thanks to the F5 developers who have created a platform which is not purely scenario driven but rather supports a comprehensive list of RFC standards which can be combined as needed. 
    For an example, one of my largest customers operates an affiliate resource tracking system with three billion web requests per day with a pretty much aggressive session setup rate during peak hours. I have designed and implemented their BIG-IP LTM platform to offload SSL-encryption and the TCP-connection handling to various backend systems using well selected and performance optimized settings. 
    Other scenarios require slightly more complex content switching, the selective use of pre-authentication and/or combination with IDS/IPS systems. To support those requirements, I developed a very granular and scalable iRule administration framework which is able to simplify the configuration by using rather easy-to-use iRule configuration files (operated by non TCL developers) which will then trigger the much more complex iRule code (written and tested by TCL developers) as needed. The latest version of my iRule administration framework (which is currently under testing/development) will be able to support a couple thousand websites on a single Virtual Server, where each websites can trigger handcrafted TCL code blocks as needed, but without adding linear or even exponential overhead to the system as the regular iRule approaches would do. The core and the configuration files of the latest version are heavily based on TCL procedures to create a very flexible code base and also conditional control structures, but completely without calling any TCL procedures during runtime to boost the performance dramatically. Sounds interesting? Then stay tuned, I am sure I will publish this framework to the CodeShare once it’s stable enough… ;-)
    DC: Lastly, if you weren’t an IT admin – what would be your dream job? Or better, when you were a kid – what did you want to be when you grew up?
    KW: I was typing my first assembler code out of a C64 magazine at the age of 10, so I really wanted to be a developer and/or IT admin since then. But besides of my current job, I can also imagine being a racecar driver. I really have petrol in my blood and pretty much enjoy driving on the German Autobahn. As an alternative, I could also imagine being a cook. I really love cooking and enjoy awesome food!

    DC: Thanks Kai! Just don't fire up that sterno while shifting gears!! Check out all of Kai’s DevCentral contributions and check out their blog websites:, and

    Thursday, January 26, 2017

    What is an Application Delivery Controller - Part II

    Application Delivery Basics

    One of the unfortunate effects of the continued evolution of the load balancer into today's application delivery controller (ADC) is that it is often too easy to forget the basic problem for which load balancers were originally created—producing highly available, scalable, and predictable application services. We get too lost in the realm of intelligent application routing, virtualized application services, and shared infrastructure deployments to remember that none of these things are possible without a firm basis in basic load balancing technology. So how important is load balancing, and how do its effects lead to streamlined application delivery?

    Let’s examine the basic application delivery transaction. The ADC will typically sit in-line between the client and the hosts that provide the services the client wants to use. As with most things in application delivery, this is not a rule, but more of a best practice in a typical deployment. Let's also assume that the ADC is already configured with a virtual server that points to a cluster consisting of two service points. In this deployment scenario, it is common for the hosts to have a return route that points back to the load balancer so that return traffic will be processed through it on its way back to the client.

    The basic application delivery transaction is as follows:

    1. The client attempts to connect with the service on the ADC.
    2. The ADC accepts the connection, and after deciding which host should receive the connection, changes the destination IP (and possibly port) to match the service of the selected host (note that the source IP of the client is not touched).
    3. The host accepts the connection and responds back to the original source, the client, via its default route, the load balancer.
    4. The ADC intercepts the return packet from the host and now changes the source IP (and possible port) to match the virtual server IP and port, and forwards the packet back to the client.
    5. The client receives the return packet, believing that it came from the virtual server or host, and continues the process. 

    Figure 1. A basic load balancing transaction.

    This very simple example is relatively straightforward, but there are a couple of key elements to take note of. First, as far as the client knows, it sends packets to the virtual server and the virtual server responds—simple. Second, the NAT takes place. This is where the ADC replaces the destination IP sent by the client (of the virtual server) with the destination IP of the host to which it has chosen to load balance the request. Step three is the second half of this process (the part that makes the NAT "bi-directional"). The source IP of the return packet from the host will be the IP of the host; if this address were not changed and the packet was simply forwarded to the client, the client would be receiving a packet from someone it didn't request one from, and would simply drop it. Instead, the ADC, remembering the connection, rewrites the packet so that the source IP is that of the virtual server, thus solving this problem.

    The Application Delivery Decision

    So, how does the ADC decide which host to send the connection to? And what happens if the selected host isn't working?

    Let's discuss the second question first. What happens if the selected host isn't working? The simple answer is that it doesn't respond to the client request and the connection attempt eventually times out and fails. This is obviously not a preferred circumstance, as it doesn't ensure high availability. That's why most ADC technology includes some level of health monitoring that determines whether a host is actually available before attempting to send connections to it.

    There are multiple levels of health monitoring, each with increasing granularity and focus. A basic monitor would simply PING the host itself. If the host does not respond to PING, it is a good assumption that any services defined on the host are probably down and should be removed from the cluster of available services. Unfortunately, even if the host responds to PING, it doesn't necessarily mean the service itself is working. Therefore most devices can do "service PINGs" of some kind, ranging from simple TCP connections all the way to interacting with the application via a scripted or intelligent interaction. These higher-level health monitors not only provide greater confidence in the availability of the actual services (as opposed to the host), but they also allow the load balancer to differentiate between multiple services on a single host. The ADC understands that while one service might be unavailable, other services on the same host might be working just fine and should still be considered as valid destinations for user traffic.

    This brings us back to the first question: How does the ADC decide which host to send a connection request to? Each virtual server has a specific dedicated cluster of services (listing the hosts that offer that service) which makes up the list of possibilities. Additionally, the health monitoring modifies that list to make a list of "currently available" hosts that provide the indicated service. It is this modified list from which the ADC chooses the host that will receive a new connection. Deciding the exact host depends on the ADC algorithm associated with that particular cluster. The most common is simple round-robin where the ADC simply goes down the list starting at the top and allocates each new connection to the next host; when it reaches the bottom of the list, it simply starts again at the top. While this is simple and very predictable, it assumes that all connections will have a similar load and duration on the back-end host, which is not always true. More advanced algorithms use things like current-connection counts, host utilization, and even real-world response times for existing traffic to the host in order to pick the most appropriate host from the available cluster services.

    Sufficiently advanced application delivery systems will also be able to synthesize health monitoring information with load balancing algorithms to include an understanding of service dependency. This is the case when a single host has multiple services, all of which are necessary to complete the user's request. A common example would be in e-commerce situations where a single host will provide both standard HTTP services (port 80) as well as HTTPS (SSL/TLS at port 443) and any other potential service ports that need to be allowed. In many of these circumstances, you don't want a user going to a host that has one service operational, but not the other. In other words, if the HTTPS services should fail on a host, you also want that host's HTTP service to be taken out of the cluster list of available services. This functionality is increasingly important as HTTP-like services become more differentiated with this things like XML and scripting.

    To Load Balance or Not to Load Balance?

    Load balancing in regards to picking an available service when a client initiates a transaction request is only half of the solution. Once the connection is established, the ADC must keep track of whether the following traffic from that user should be load balanced. There are generally two specific issues with handling follow-on traffic once it has been load balanced: connection maintenance and persistence.

    Connection maintenance

    If the user is trying to utilize a long-lived TCP connection (telnet, FTP, and more) that doesn't immediately close, the ADC must ensure that multiple data packets carried across that connection do not get load balanced to other available service hosts. This is connection maintenance and requires two key capabilities: 1) the ability to keep track of open connections and the host service they belong to; and 2) the ability to continue to monitor that connection so the connection table can be updated when the connection closes. This is rather standard fare for most ADCs.


    Increasingly more common, however, is when the client uses multiple short-lived TCP connections (for example, HTTP) to accomplish a single task. In some cases, like standard web browsing, it doesn't matter and each new request can go to any of the back-end service hosts; however, there are many more instances (XML, JavaScript, e-commerce "shopping cart," HTTPS, and so on) where it is extremely important that multiple connections from the same user go to the same back-end service host and not be load balanced. This concept is called persistence, or server affinity. There are multiple ways to address this depending on the protocol and the desired results. For example, in modern HTTP transactions, the server can specify a "keep-alive" connection, which turns those multiple short-lived connections into a single long-lived connection that can be handled just like the other long-lived connections. However, this provides little relief. Even worse, as the use of web and mobile services increases, keeping all of these connections open longer than necessary would strain the resources of the entire system. In these cases, most ADCs provide other mechanisms for creating artificial server affinity.

    One of the most basic forms of persistence is source-address affinity. Source address affinity persistence directs session requests to the same server based solely on the source IP address of a packet. This involves simply recording the source IP address of incoming requests and the service host they were load balanced to, and making all future transaction go to the same host. This is also an easy way to deal with application dependency as it can be applied across all virtual servers and all services. In practice however, the wide-spread use of proxy servers on the Internet and internally in enterprise networks renders this form of persistence almost useless; in theory it works, but proxy-servers inherently hide many users behind a single IP address resulting in none of those users being load balanced after the first user's request—essentially nullifying the ADC capability. Today, the intelligence of ADCs allows organizations to actually open up the data packets and create persistence tables for virtually anything within it. This enables them to use much more unique and identifiable information, such as user name, to maintain persistence. However, organizations one must take care to ensure that this identifiable client information will be present in every request made, as any packets without it will not be persisted and will be load balanced again, most likely breaking the application.

    Final Thoughts

    It is important to understand that basic load balancing technology, while still in use, is now only considered a feature of Application Delivery Controllers. ADCs evolved from the first load balancers through the service virtualization process and today with software only virtual editions. They can not only improve availability, but also affect the security and performance of the application services being requested.

    Today, most organizations realize that simply being able to reach an application doesn't make it usable; and unusable applications mean wasted time and money for the enterprise deploying them. ADCs enable organizations to consolidate network-based services like SSL/TLS offload, caching, compression, rate-shaping, intrusion detection, application firewalls, and even remote access into a single strategic point that can be shared and reused across all application services and all hosts to create a virtualized Application Delivery Network. Basic load balancing is the foundation without which none of the enhanced functionality of today's ADCs would be possible.

    And if you missed What is an ADC Part 1, you can find it here.


    Next Steps

    Now that you’ve gotten this far, would you like to dig deeper or learn more about how application delivery works? Cool, then check out these resources: