Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: High Speed Firewalls
From: Bennett Todd <bet () rahul net>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 11:14:20 -0500
It's been a while since I read the specs on BigIP, but I definitely remember failing to find anything about tracking the performance of individual servers in the farm, to adaptively balance load to fit. Perhaps this has been added since? In some settings this won't matter, and in those settings a LocalDirector is overpriced (and hits the wall sooner than some of its competition). If there's another load balancer that keeps track of the performance of each server in its farm, and adapts the load to always preferentially send traffic to the then-fastest server, I'd love to learn about it. While I do try and specify identically-configured servers in the farm, I still really enjoy the LocalDirector's behavior. It gives me the freedom to inflict some significant processing load on servers within the farm, with the confidence that the LocalDirector will back off the loaded servers if I manage to hit 'em hard enough so they're no longer keeping up with their brethren. I end up taking advantage of this for content replication, database rebuilds, backups, etc. So until I hear about another load balancer that adapts to varying server capacity, I'll continue to prefer LocalDirector, without even having tried the others --- just on specs alone. I haven't yet had to try and actually implement a distributed load-balancing solution, one for spreading traffic among multiple server farms scattered about different backbones. I'd love to learn if anything out there actually does a great job of this; it's a wicked hard problem. I really wish there were support built right into DNS, implemented in most clients, for load-balancing; then we'd be sitting pretty. Introduce a special load-balancing record type, where the returned value from a query contains a list of IP addresses, and the client is encouraged to send its first queries to all the addresses in the list, and keep sending them to all addresses until it gets an answer back, then prefer the first one that answered, or maybe round-robin among the first N if several answered really quickly. Without such support, the job of routing a given client to the best server is impossible, and simply trying to route them to a good choice is fiendishly difficult in the face of network congestion and outages constantly changing the relative "nearness" of various points to each other. -Bennett
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- RE: High Speed Firewalls, (continued)
- RE: High Speed Firewalls John F. Appel (Mar 02)
- RE: High Speed Firewalls Dippold, John (Mar 02)
- RE: High Speed Firewalls Sink, Douglas D (Doug), BNSVC (Mar 02)
- RE: High Speed Firewalls Burden, James (Mar 02)
- RE: High Speed Firewalls Woeltje, Donald (Mar 03)
- RE: High Speed Firewalls Rick Murphy (Mar 03)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Bennett Todd (Mar 05)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Paul D. Robertson (Mar 06)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Bennett Todd (Mar 06)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Paul D. Robertson (Mar 06)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Bennett Todd (Mar 06)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Chenggong Charles Fan (Mar 08)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Bennett Todd (Mar 12)
- personal firewalls Randy Grimshaw (Mar 13)
- Re: personal firewalls Rick Murphy (Mar 21)
- Re: personal firewalls elad (Mar 21)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Mike Barkett (Mar 07)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Bennett Todd (Mar 07)
- Active FTP behind a router doing NAT Arnaud Chiaberge (Mar 12)
- Re: Active FTP behind a router doing NAT Ryan Russell (Mar 17)
- Re: High Speed Firewalls Eric Hall (Mar 13)