RE: LoadBalancing products: Cisco LocalDirector

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer () mhsc com>]

I heard rumor that Cisco was considering including LD capability
in the 6509 MSN router module?

> Stephen Sprunk: Friday, July 07, 2000 5:46 PM
>
> If you are using a LocalDirector with a Cat6k switch, you can
> enable the
> Accelerated Server Load Balancing feature.  This allows the
Cat6k to
> forward the bulk of the flow (at wire speed), and lets the LD
focus
> exclusively on the connection setup/teardown functions.
>
> For more information:
> http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/localdir
> /ld33rns/l
> dicgd/ld3_ch04.htm#xtocid1675521
>
> S
>
>      |          |         Stephen Sprunk, K5SSS, CCIE #3723
>     :|:        :|:        Network Design Consultant, HCOE
>    :|||:      :|||:       14875 Landmark Blvd #400; Dallas, TX
> .:|||||||:..:|||||||:.    Email: ssprunk () cisco com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Karyn Ulriksen" <kulriksen () publichost com>
> To: "'Bennett Todd'" <bet () rahul net>; "Karyn Ulriksen"
> <kulriksen () publichost com>
> Cc: <nanog () merit edu>
> Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 11:40
> Subject: RE: LoadBalancing products: Foundry ServerIron
>
>
> > A friend of mine was using LD's on his service.  They do
> about 180mbps
> over
> > 3 locations and were running performance problems. (They
ended up
> moving to
> > F5's).  One of Exodus's Senior Network Engineers has seen
that
> consistenly
> > become problematic at about the magic 80mbps you mentioned.
I spoke
> with a
> > few different neteng buddies when we started looking at LB's
over a
> year ago
> > and they all told me to stay away from the LD's.  But like
> all of us,
> they
> > get better as they stay around longer...
> >
> > Probably, it's the same with all LB products ... you have
> to match the
> right
> > products with your needs.  Me, I have to go for the big
> scale. So I'll
> > sacrifice features for ability to consistently handle the
> traffic and
> > scalability.  I eliminated quite a few simply because they
couldn't
> handle
> > the volume, but that doesn't mean that they would work well
> for a site
> > located in one of the big data centers.
> >
> >  -Karyn