Firstly, sorry about misspelling your name. I was still half asleep, but
that's no excuse. My bad.

 

We aren't getting switched up sessions. It's more like user A hits server 1,
then bounces to server 2, but server 2 doesn't know how to retrieve the
session for user A correctly.

 

Thanks for the link and info on patch levels. I haven't checked into that
yet, so I will.

 

Regards,

 

Ryan Riley

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Shawn Neal
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2011 8:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Network Load Balance Testing

 

What do you mean by, "wrong session information?"  Does that mean user A
sometimes gets the session data for user B, or user A has 2 unique sessions?

 

Session state is only dependent upon the session cookie and not source IPs.
One issue you can have in a web farm is if they have different .NET patch
levels, specifically this hotfix: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2416472.
It changes how .NET decrypts view state and session cookies amongst other
things.  If you have two servers in a farm, one with and one without the
patch, you'll have all kinds of problems... even if they have the same
machine keys.

 

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 8:05 AM, Ryan Riley <[email protected]>
wrote:

Thanks for your response, Sean.

 

We are using Microsoft NLB, and we have a few scenarios where reverse
proxies cause our customers HTTP and HTTPS traffic to come from different IP
addresses. We are using SQL Server Session storage on a shared database
server, and our machine keys are the same on both of our NLB web servers.
However, we've watched what appear to be valid requests not pull in the
correct session information when the user session hops between our servers.

 

I'm trying to figure out how I can reproduce this locally so that I can
isolate and resolve the problem in our web app, NLB cluster, or whatever
else is actually causing the problem.

 

Thanks!

 

Ryan

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Shawn Neal
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 6:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Network Load Balance Testing

 

Are you trying to determine the overhead of having to renegotiate SSL when
switching between https and http and/or between https requests?  Are you
specifically talking about Windows NLB?

 

There's definitely overhead if you have to renegotiate a SSL session between
each request if the load balancer sends you to a different server every
time.  I'm not sure how/if Windows NLB handles this.

 

When we were testing SSL re-negotiate overhead we ended up doing this in our
performance lab with Load Runner.  We basically compared ART and CPU of load
balanced http, https, and https with sticky sessions (didn't try SSL term at
the VIP).  We ended up using SSL with sticky sessions because we were able
to use commodity hardware using layer 4 routing via HA-Proxy rather than
dealing with the overhead of layer 7 or an expensive hardware load balancer.

 

Good luck!

 

-Shawn

 

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Ryan Riley <[email protected]>
wrote:

Any recommendations on testing a NLB environment? In particular, I'm trying
to find a way to explore the impact in our environment of bouncing between
our NLB servers, especially when switching between HTTP and HTTPS. Any
thoughts are appreciated. I'm having a hard time tracking anything down on
this one.

 

Cheers!


Ryan Riley

Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley
Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/
Website: http://panesofglass.org/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Seattle area Alt.Net" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:altnetseattle%[email protected]> .
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Seattle area Alt.Net" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Seattle area Alt.Net" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:altnetseattle%[email protected]> .
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Seattle area Alt.Net" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Seattle area Alt.Net" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.

Reply via email to