Ah ha, This is exactly what I was looking for. Now, is there any special config on ethe 25,26? If you know cisco-speak, are these the equivalent of an etherchannel pair?
Even with an 8 source IP limitation, that lets us reduce our XL's by a factor of 8, since our main shared pair serves one class c currently, and customers who need their own dedicated vlan/address space, or want dedicated firewalls, they get their own pair of XL's. Matt On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 17:28, Cliff Fogle wrote: > I do this using subnet vlans. All virtuals are in the same subnet as > the reals. > > Something along these lines: > > vlan 110 by port > tagged ethe 25 to 26 > ip-subnet 192.168.4.0 255.255.255.0 > ! > vlan 111 by port > tagged ethe 25 to 26 > ip-subnet 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0 > > Making sure to give the serveriron all necessary source ip's: > > (from global config mode) > > server source-ip 192.168.5.254 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 > > The source Ip is pretty much just to make sure that the keepalives get > out on the right vlan. The catch?: You can only have 8 source ip's on > a single XL... > > Here is what foundry has to say about it: > http://www.foundrynet.com/services/documentation/sribcg/VLANs.html#16034 > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Stockdale > Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 2:22 PM > To: jeffrey.arnold > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [f-nsp] Centralized Load balancing via 802.1q? > > Maybe I should have mentioned that the serveriron XL's have a single > ethernet connection to our core switch. We cannot use them as access > switches. We already do exclusively DSR, and this works fine for > balancing real servers on the same vlan and layer3 space as the XL. > > Let me whip up a quick diagram of what we'd like to do (don't know how > well it will render for you) > > ServerIron > | > | > (dot1q trunk) > (vlans 1-100) > | > | > Cat6500----------------- > | | > | | > (dot1q trunk) (dot1q trunk) > (vlans 1-100) (vlans 1-100) > | | > | | > Cat2950 Cat2950 > | | > | | > (access port) (access port) > (vlan 20) (vlan 21) > | | > | | > Real Server A Real Server B > (192.168.20.101) (102.168.21.101) > > I'd like to be able to have the ServerIron create a VIP on vlan 20, > 192.168.20.100 for example, and balance across 192.168.20.10[1-x] I'd > also like to have the ServerIron create a VIP on vlan 21, > 192.168.21.100, and balance across 192.168.21.10[1-x] at the same time. > > Currently, if we have our XL configured on the 192.168.20.0/24 Space, we > can't balance anything on 192.168.21.0/24 without source-nat (at least > according to foundry support) > > Does that help explain what I'm looking to do? > > Matt > > On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 17:02, jeffrey.arnold wrote: > > On Thu, 27 May 2004, Matt Stockdale wrote: > > > > :: dsr. I think the problem is that we have ServerIron XL's, which > > seem to > > :: be 90% layer2, and thus lack the feature I'm looking for, which is > > :: heavily layer 3. > > :: > > > > both the XL's and chassis based boxes work fine. In a dsr config, you > > shouldn't need to do much more than define your router port(s) and tag > > > up the correct vlans. The foundry will do some L2 magic to get the > > packets out with the correct vlan tags. > > > > -jba > > > > __ > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] :: analogue.networks.nyc :: http://analogue.net > -- > ----------------------- > Matt Stockdale > Sr Network Engineer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- ----------------------- Matt Stockdale Sr Network Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/foundry-nsp/attachments/20040527/5ea0cf5c/attachment.bin From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu May 27 19:41:42 2004 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cliff Fogle) Date: Thu May 27 19:42:29 2004 Subject: [f-nsp] Centralized Load balancing via 802.1q? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yeah, those are the two gig ports on the XL which are trunked/channeled/bonded together. Also, check the 8 number. I might be wrong. There is some limitation though, I just can't find the foundry doc that I read it in. -----Original Message----- From: Matt Stockdale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 2:35 PM To: Cliff Fogle Cc: jeffrey.arnold; [email protected] Subject: RE: [f-nsp] Centralized Load balancing via 802.1q? Ah ha, This is exactly what I was looking for. Now, is there any special config on ethe 25,26? If you know cisco-speak, are these the equivalent of an etherchannel pair? Even with an 8 source IP limitation, that lets us reduce our XL's by a factor of 8, since our main shared pair serves one class c currently, and customers who need their own dedicated vlan/address space, or want dedicated firewalls, they get their own pair of XL's. Matt On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 17:28, Cliff Fogle wrote: > I do this using subnet vlans. All virtuals are in the same subnet as > the reals. > > Something along these lines: > > vlan 110 by port > tagged ethe 25 to 26 > ip-subnet 192.168.4.0 255.255.255.0 > ! > vlan 111 by port > tagged ethe 25 to 26 > ip-subnet 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0 > > Making sure to give the serveriron all necessary source ip's: > > (from global config mode) > > server source-ip 192.168.5.254 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 > > The source Ip is pretty much just to make sure that the keepalives get > out on the right vlan. The catch?: You can only have 8 source ip's > on a single XL... > > Here is what foundry has to say about it: > http://www.foundrynet.com/services/documentation/sribcg/VLANs.html#160 > 34 > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt > Stockdale > Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 2:22 PM > To: jeffrey.arnold > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [f-nsp] Centralized Load balancing via 802.1q? > > Maybe I should have mentioned that the serveriron XL's have a single > ethernet connection to our core switch. We cannot use them as access > switches. We already do exclusively DSR, and this works fine for > balancing real servers on the same vlan and layer3 space as the XL. > > Let me whip up a quick diagram of what we'd like to do (don't know how > well it will render for you) > > ServerIron > | > | > (dot1q trunk) > (vlans 1-100) > | > | > Cat6500----------------- > | | > | | > (dot1q trunk) (dot1q trunk) > (vlans 1-100) (vlans 1-100) > | | > | | > Cat2950 Cat2950 > | | > | | > (access port) (access port) > (vlan 20) (vlan 21) > | | > | | > Real Server A Real Server B > (192.168.20.101) (102.168.21.101) > > I'd like to be able to have the ServerIron create a VIP on vlan 20, > 192.168.20.100 for example, and balance across 192.168.20.10[1-x] I'd > also like to have the ServerIron create a VIP on vlan 21, > 192.168.21.100, and balance across 192.168.21.10[1-x] at the same time. > > Currently, if we have our XL configured on the 192.168.20.0/24 Space, > we can't balance anything on 192.168.21.0/24 without source-nat (at > least according to foundry support) > > Does that help explain what I'm looking to do? > > Matt > > On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 17:02, jeffrey.arnold wrote: > > On Thu, 27 May 2004, Matt Stockdale wrote: > > > > :: dsr. I think the problem is that we have ServerIron XL's, which > > seem to > > :: be 90% layer2, and thus lack the feature I'm looking for, which > > is > > :: heavily layer 3. > > :: > > > > both the XL's and chassis based boxes work fine. In a dsr config, > > you shouldn't need to do much more than define your router port(s) > > and tag > > > up the correct vlans. The foundry will do some L2 magic to get the > > packets out with the correct vlan tags. > > > > -jba > > > > __ > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] :: analogue.networks.nyc :: http://analogue.net > -- > ----------------------- > Matt Stockdale > Sr Network Engineer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- ----------------------- Matt Stockdale Sr Network Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
