I don't speak "Azure", but if they have something that claims to be a
load balancer, then "sure", just have to deal with stickiness issues and
of course the fact that you're load balancing load balancers.
(you likely need Application Gateway)
On 07/12/2018 05:50 PM, musafir wrote:
Hey Folks,
On 17/02/2015 01:11 μμ, Mariusz Gronczewski wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 12:41:06 +0100, Klavs Klavsen k...@vsen.dk wrote:
As I understand anycast and ECMP (and I only know guys who use it and
know what they are doing ;) - it needs to be two different routes (ie.
routers) that are
our setup(1 DC):
* active-active ECMP
* 4 loadbalancers + bird OSPF
* 2 routers + OSPF
* IPs are on loopback interface, added and removed when haproxy service
starts/stops
* OSPF distributes routes to these IPs to routers
* routers route by source IP so same IP always lands on same
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 12:41:06 +0100, Klavs Klavsen k...@vsen.dk wrote:
As I understand anycast and ECMP (and I only know guys who use it and
know what they are doing ;) - it needs to be two different routes (ie.
routers) that are active/active.. ie. multiple location.. but I guess
one could
Lukas Tribus wrote on 02/16/2015 01:55 PM:
[CUT]
You use ECMP for load-balancing between different servers in a
single PoP/DC and anycast to route the request to the nearest PoP/DC.
As I understand wikipedia - it is discouraged to use ECMP for
loadbalancing.. Load balancing by per-packet
❦ 16 février 2015 14:31 +0100, Lukas Tribus luky...@hotmail.com :
As I understand wikipedia - it is discouraged to use ECMP for
loadbalancing.. Load balancing by per-packet multipath routing is
generally deprecated due to the impact of rapidly changing latency,
packet reordering..
Nobody
Isn't that used more as a multiple datacenter active/active setup thing?
being in the routing part.. and not LAN side of things.
that's the only places I've seen that used.. it's very cool though :)
As I understand anycast and ECMP (and I only know guys who use it and
know what they are
❦ 16 février 2015 14:07 +0100, Klavs Klavsen k...@vsen.dk :
You use ECMP for load-balancing between different servers in a
single PoP/DC and anycast to route the request to the nearest PoP/DC.
As I understand wikipedia - it is discouraged to use ECMP for
loadbalancing.. Load balancing by
As I understand wikipedia - it is discouraged to use ECMP for
loadbalancing.. Load balancing by per-packet multipath routing is
generally deprecated due to the impact of rapidly changing latency,
packet reordering..
Nobody does per-packet multipathing anymore, in fact, when you use
ECMP for
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 16, Mathieu Sergent wrote:
Now i use two HAProxy active/passive with keepalived, which make the load
balancing on web servers.
I would know if it's possible to use two HAProxy in active/active mode ? I
know keepalived can't managed it, because it uses the protocol VRRP. I made
Openbsd carp
El 16-02-2015 7:16, Mathieu Sergent mathieu.sergent...@gmail.com
escribió:
Hi,
Now i use two HAProxy active/passive with keepalived, which make the load
balancing on web servers.
I would know if it's possible to use two HAProxy in active/active mode ? I
know keepalived can't
Thanks for your reply.
I really want to have two active/active, keepalived can't deal with it.
Furthermore, i try to not use a load balancing with dns.
Regards,
Mathieu
2015-02-16 11:31 GMT+01:00 Jarno Huuskonen jarno.huusko...@uef.fi:
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 16, Mathieu Sergent wrote:
Now i use
In each proposition, there is a single master (DNS, LVS...), which
load-balance on two HAProxy.
Me, I try to choose a solution with two master, which will be my two
HAProxy.
Maybe it's impossible and i dream ^^, but this is what I need.
Regards,
Mathieu
2015-02-16 12:00 GMT+01:00 Baptiste
Mathieu Sergent wrote on 02/16/2015 12:12 PM:
In each proposition, there is a single master (DNS, LVS...), which
load-balance on two HAProxy.
Me, I try to choose a solution with two master, which will be my two
HAProxy.
Maybe it's impossible and i dream ^^, but this is what I need.
well.. it
In each proposition, there is a single master (DNS, LVS...), which
load-balance on two HAProxy.
Me, I try to choose a solution with two master, which will be my two HAProxy.
Maybe it's impossible and i dream ^^, but this is what I need.
CDN's work with anycast and ECMP, that will solve
Lukas Tribus wrote on 02/16/2015 12:33 PM:
In each proposition, there is a single master (DNS, LVS...), which
load-balance on two HAProxy.
Me, I try to choose a solution with two master, which will be my two HAProxy.
Maybe it's impossible and i dream ^^, but this is what I need.
CDN's work
It's a point in time dump and restore of the in flight packets.
Can't dump the details and in flight content of a TCP session if
the host is already dead.
So either this will work only for manual switchovers (but not for
sudden hardware/software failure; also at this point TCP connection
On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:00:37 +0100 in
dub107-w49d4acd0d650efad62fd57ed...@phx.gbl, Lukas Tribus Lukas
Tribus luky...@hotmail.com wrote:
It's a point in time dump and restore of the in flight packets.
Can't dump the details and in flight content of a TCP session if
the host is already
Hi Jerome,
Do you have any good reason to setup an active/active cluster?
crossed VIPs hosted by VRRP is recommended for simple active/active
setup then as you mentioned, playing with DNS RR.
conntrack is a bad idea with haproxy ;)
If you expect a massive traffic, it's better to use a first
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 07:04:02 +0100 in
caodhi7opnvfifb3uwzsr0awdesmg7uz0-f+zu4syr+peh1q...@mail.gmail.com,
Baptiste Baptiste bed...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jerome,
Do you have any good reason to setup an active/active cluster?
cheap hosting with no control on their backbone and network load on
On Mar 19, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
cheap hosting with no control on their backbone and network load on one
box reach the max.
So what happens when you lose a system? If you are doing active/active and
either/both systems are above 50% utilized, you're going to have an issue
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 12:06:47 -0400 in
2cf188ce-49a7-43cc-aa21-81cdc10cd...@davidcoulson.net, David Coulson
David Coulson da...@davidcoulson.net wrote:
On Mar 19, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
cheap hosting with no control on their backbone and network load on one
box reach
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 07:04:02 +0100 in
caodhi7opnvfifb3uwzsr0awdesmg7uz0-f+zu4syr+peh1q...@mail.gmail.com,
Baptiste Baptiste bed...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
conntrack is a bad idea with haproxy ;)
Could you elaborate ?
Does HAProxy already fill the connection table of the underlying OS
so
conntrackd permit to also share TCP states between boxes that will
also run iptables
With conntrackd-syncing you just allow the packet to pass the iptables
barrier; but the session will still be dropped by the OS because the
TCP stack doesn't know the socket, and so does not the application.
24 matches
Mail list logo
