Follow-up · depth 8
Compare L4 vs L7 Load Balancing with a common alternative in a design review
Compare L4 vs L7 Load Balancing with a common alternative in a design review
Answers use simple, clear English.
Quick interview answer
Compare L4 vs L7 Load Balancing vs the usual alternative on complexity, latency, failure modes, and ops cost. Pros: L7 smart routing; L4 performance for non-HTTP. Cons: L7 terminates TLS — cert management; L4 no URL awareness.
Detailed answer
Design-review comparison for L4 vs L7 Load Balancing: Axes: correctness, latency, throughput, complexity, operability. From the topic: Pros: L7 smart routing; L4 performance for non-HTTP. Cons: L7 terminates TLS — cert management; L4 no URL awareness. Recommendation: pick L4 vs L7 Load Balancing when its strengths match the SLO; otherwise choose the alternative and say why. Parent context: Use L4 vs L7 Load Balancing as the core idea. Example shape: ALB routes /api → API target group, /static → S3; NLB for gRPC TCP passthrough..
Full explanation
Show a clear decision framework, not “it depends” with no criteria. Pros: L7 smart routing; L4 performance for non-HTTP. Cons: L7 terminates TLS — cert management; L4 no URL awareness.
Follow-up questions
Only answered follow-ups are shown — click to open with full answers
Parent context — L4 vs L7 Load Balancing
Use L4 vs L7 Load Balancing as the core idea. Example shape: ALB routes /api → API target group, /static → S3; NLB for gRPC TCP passthrough..
View full parent question →