Heh. I hate the ACE gui mode. I think I used it once... L2 load balancing is a big plus for us. We are currently using the ACE with inline mode (L2 bridging). Most of our traffic is not HTTP, but a combination of internal application and commercial ones (Exchange, etc...), so some HTTP, but not a majority.
---- Matthew Huff | 1 Manhattanville Rd Director of Operations | Purchase, NY 10577 OTA Management LLC | Phone: 914-460-4039 aim: matthewbhuff | Fax: 914-460-4139 > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Phil > Mayers > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 1:10 PM > To: Chris Marlatt > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Replacement for Cisco ACE load balancers > > On 04/02/13 17:56, Chris Marlatt wrote: > > > The Foundry/Brocade ServerIron's/ADX line work's quite well in a L2 or > > L3 environment without NAT or being in-line. Enabling DSR (direct server > > return, in an L2 environment) means the LB doesn't have to be within the > > path of the normal switching/routing and their ADX line has support for > > true multi-10Gb throughputs. DSR also means you're not burning up the > > Interesting. Is it particularly / prohibitively expensive? Several other > vendors hinted that a 10gig SLB device was "way out of proportion to our > needs" and "very expensive". > > > "Application Throughput" limits of the device on other traffic patterns. > > Stability is stellar when it comes to these units, I've some of my > > ServerIron 4G's online for over 1,200 days (1,277 and counting) without > > blinking. > > This is an excellent point. We run several services in DSR mode, which > the ACE obviously handles fine, and I'd encourage everyone that can do > this, on whatever platform, to do so. > > However, DSR is fairly simplistic, and requires config on the server > (provision of the virtual IP) which often can be a pain, depending on > your platform and level of network/server team integration. > > We also find that port rewriting, SSL termination and header/cookie > insertion are pretty common requirements, which pretty much means inline > (either on packet path, or source NAT to direct return traffic back to SLB). > > > Each vendor has it's strengths and weaknesses and whereas I'm quite > > pleased with the Foundry/Brocade models the only area I would say they > > need work in a robust API interface to help automate changes. However > > they have made recent improvements in their multi-tendency support. > > One thing I will note - the Cisco ACE management product (ANM) is... not > great, to put it politely. If GUI management is a concern, then factor > that in ;o) > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
