I'll make a recommendation for anyone who uses Microsoft's NLB to look at some 
open source options. We took out NLB because of all the inherent network 
issues, at the same college, for a HAProxy solution on linux. It's free, takes 
fewer resources, far superior to NLB and it's application layer load balancing. 
You won't ever have these network problem with it.

Stephen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Reinhard Strebler" <[email protected]>
To: "Enterasys Customer Mailing List" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Hugo Veiga" <[email protected]>, "Sean M Sheil" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 2, 2011 10:10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [enterasys] Configuration question

Hi,

we are using NLB for several servers, too. I hate NLB, but there was no 
other solution available.

What we did:
We used multicast NLB with static arp entries. For each server we 
defined a small subnet (/28 or /29, respectively), containing router 
addresses, physical interface IPs and the service IP (each service ip is 
requiring a static arp entry on the router). For each subnet we defined 
a VLAN and as new switch ports as possible.

With this implementation we reduced flooding, since only some few 
switches and a very small broadcast domain where involved.

Kind regards
Reinhard


Am 02.05.2011 11:02, schrieb Hugo Veiga:
> Hi,
>
> We have microsoft NLB to.
>
> I must say this was a little bit tricky. First we used unicast NLB and
> this flooded all ports on the same vlan. But then we configured
> igmpsnooping and set the servers to use multicast with IGMP. The flood
> stopped and the servers work fine as before. I advise you to try the same.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Hugo Veiga
>
>
>
> Em 5/2/2011 6:05 AM, Sheil,Sean M escreveu:
>> We had an issue with the Microsoft NLB that was causing an arp flood.
>> We had other issues that I cannot fully explain at this point.  Our
>> network has been very stable for many years.  In essence, this NLB
>> problem had been going on for quite some time, however with additional
>> devices hitting OWA and our web server the problem finally hit a
>> breaking point.  The budget constraints are tied to purchasing the
>> additional licenses for routing.
>>
>> Sean
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: William Olive [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 4:17 AM
>> To: Enterasys Customer Mailing List
>> Subject: RE:[enterasys] Configuration question
>>
>> Sean
>>
>> What was the issue that caused you to re-think your routing strategy?
>>
>> And what budget constraint implies that you must use static routes as
>> opposed to a dynamic routing policy?
>>
>>
>> Billo
>> Data Communications Co-Ordinator
>> Information Technology&   Telecommunications
>> Hunter New England Health Service
>> ph 0249 213804 fax 0249 213038
>> [email protected]
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Sheil,Sean M [[email protected]]
>> Sent: Saturday, 30 April 2011 2:58 PM
>> To: Enterasys Customer Mailing List
>> Subject: [enterasys] Configuration question
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>           We have a 99% Enterasys network.  At our core we are replacing
>> our dfe blades with an S4.  Three years ago, I move all of the routing
>> from the edge devices (E1's) to the core.  Everything had run fine until
>> an issue occurred recently.  Now the thought process has been to move
>> the routing back out to the edge devices using static routes.  I am
>> looking for external advise on the pros and cons of making this change.
>> We have 40+ subnets/vlans.  The remote buildings will have a G3 at the
>> entrance with 2 - 3 E1's stacked behind.  At some point in time, we have
>> had up to 13K devices connect to our network.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Sean
>> ---
>> Sean M. Sheil, GSEC-Gold
>> Sr. Systems Administrator
>> Northwest Missouri State University
>> 660.541.3021
>>
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe from enterasys, send email to [email protected] with the
>> body: unsubscribe enterasys [email protected]
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe from enterasys, send email to [email protected] with the
>> body: unsubscribe enterasys [email protected]
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe from enterasys, send email to [email protected] with the body: 
>> unsubscribe enterasys [email protected]
>> .
>>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> UBI amiga do ambiente: Antes de imprimir este e-mail pense bem se tem mesmo 
> que o fazer. As árvores são um bem imprescindível.
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe from enterasys, send email to [email protected] with the body: 
> unsubscribe enterasys [email protected]

---
To unsubscribe from enterasys, send email to [email protected] with the body: 
unsubscribe enterasys [email protected]

---
To unsubscribe from enterasys, send email to [email protected] with the body: 
unsubscribe enterasys [email protected]

Reply via email to