RE: Server Redundancy

If the servers are in two separate locations, like two datacenters on either
side of the country, you are stuck with DNS-based load balancing. Like
others have mentioned, Cisco, F5 and others have products which will handle
this for you and take into account some other factors when directing
traffic. DNS load balancing works quite well, I've used the F5 BigIP and
3dns extensively, and the Foundry ServerIron (which is fairly cheap).

A little more detail into what you are trying to do would help. The most
common setup with this is to have multiple datacenters, and each datacenter
has a cluster of identical servers behind something like a BigIP. The
traffic is load balanced at that level, but your Global load balancer which
hands out DNS communicates with the local guy to figure out what the current
traffic ratio is and modifys its dns replys accordingly.

There used to be a free one for linux called Eddie, which looked quite
robust. I think it was eddieware.org or eddieware.com. There is also the
linux virtual server project, but I don't believe it has support for Global
load balancing, only local.

As a side note, I've used Cisco's CSS, F5's stuff, Alteon, and Foundry. Out
of all of them that I've used, the Foundry had the least problems and had a
nicely structured config. I would recommend the CSS, but it seems to have
quite a few bugs in the code that still need to be worked out, but the
support for SSL acceleration is nice. F5... I used to really like F5. In
fact, I was one of their beta sites back in 1999 and 2000. After some
problems with code that "broke" things, we discontinued the beta program
with them. Shortly after, their new releases were getting worse and worse,
their support seemed unwilling to help (for almost $100k a year in support,
you'd think they would care), so I switched to Foundry. An insider over at
F5 told me that most of the people who had written the original code back in
1999/2000 were all gone, and most of the problems were a result of the new
people not yet wrapping their heads around the code. This was about 2 years
ago, so it's possible they've figured out how everything is put together and
it's better now. For awhile though, it was quite bad. Feature-wise, F5 has
more features than any of the other ones, Cisco CSS comes in a somewhat
distant second place. For most people, any of the above will suffice and
most of the features available in F5 and Cisco are just nice-to-have's and
not a requirement.

-jay

I was totally green to Cisco IOS when I was working on the
Arrowpoint at the time. I liken the bugs on the CSS to normal cisco IOS
quirks/bugs. (Complete with TAC trying to come up with reasons certain
features weren't available yet.)

I remember upgrading my Arrowpoint 1100 the first time Cisco released the
code for it and thinking the only thing they changed was the startup ASCII
logo. :slight_smile:

We all hedged bets that Cisco was going to absorb the CSS and just make it
a software feature on the Catalyst switches. I haven't heard of that
actually happening yet though.

G

Gerald wrote:

We all hedged bets that Cisco was going to absorb the CSS and just make it
a software feature on the Catalyst switches. I haven't heard of that
actually happening yet though.

No, but there is some interesting new functionality in the latest revs of IOS which look awefully borrowed from the CSS. Haven't had time to dive in yet, though.

-Jack

Foundry seems to be fine for www traffic, but has serious issues with
handling long FTP sessions. FTP works while you're in your stickiness
period (up to 2 hours on the non-XL serveriron), but after that it will
forget which FTP server has the control session and send your next data
session to another server which won't recognise it. Last time I spoke to
Foundry, this was still considered a "feature".

Do other vendors handle this properly?

Rich

In the immortal words of variable@ednet.co.uk (variable@ednet.co.uk):

> As a side note, I've used Cisco's CSS, F5's stuff, Alteon, and Foundry. Out
> of all of them that I've used, the Foundry had the least problems and had a
> nicely structured config.

Foundry seems to be fine for www traffic, but has serious issues with
handling long FTP sessions. FTP works while you're in your stickiness
period (up to 2 hours on the non-XL serveriron), but after that it will
forget which FTP server has the control session and send your next data
session to another server which won't recognise it. Last time I spoke to
Foundry, this was still considered a "feature".

Do other vendors handle this properly?

I recall that Resonate Central Dispatch handled this well the last
time I looked, but the last time I looked was about 3 years ago now,
so take that for what it's worth. (www.resonate.com)

-n

------------------------------------------------------------<memory@blank.org>
My goal is real simple: to write better than anyone who can write faster than
me, and faster than anyone who can write better than me. (--J.M. Straczynski)
<http://blank.org/memory/>----------------------------------------------------