Re: LVS, load balancing, and stickness was ==> Re: [Serusers] more usrloc synchronization
As well as I am.
"Greger V. Teigre" greger@teigre.com wrote:> The only bright point I can offer here is that I'm 100% certain that
the LVS source code has __not__ been modified.
Which really makes me annoyed, because I cannot right now see any other obvious path (i.e. simpler). g-)
Sorry, Paul
On Apr 11, 2005 4:46 AM, Greger V. Teigre greger@teigre.com wrote: After my last email, I looked at ktcpvs and realized I ignored a couple of things: ktcpvs only supports tcp (http is obviously tcp-based, but I thought it supported udp for other protocols). I don't know how much work implementing udp would be. Here is a discussion of SIP and LVS that I found useful (though not encouraging). http://www.austintek.com/LVS/LVS-HOWTO/HOWTO/LVS-HOWTO.services_that_dont_wo...
Paul: I'm starting to get really curious on the standard LVS components used for your stickiness! I'm not aware (also after searching now) of an LVS balancing mechanism that allows correct stickness on SIP udp...! And I found other too who are looking for it: http://archive.linuxvirtualserver.org/html/lvs-users/2005-02/msg00251.html
My understanding is that ipvs must be extended (according to the developer) with a call-id based scheduler and that this work has several people willing to fund development, but that this has not(?) started yet. The problem is that ipvs is based on ip header analysis and extending the hashing algorithms to also include payload-based analysis is not straight-forward. g-)
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
You are probably right. HSRP could actually be used for load balancing, as could VRRP (which is what I believe you mean by active/active) by defining multiple standby groups per interface with recirprocal priorities on the groups.
The same thing could be done with VRRP by using multiple virtual routers and reversing the priorities, but then one would need a different IP address for each of the VRIDs.
On 4/14/05, Tina kramarv@yahoo.com wrote:
As well as I am.
"Greger V. Teigre" greger@teigre.com wrote:
The only bright point I can offer here is that I'm 100% certain that the LVS source code has __not__ been modified.
Which really makes me annoyed, because I cannot right now see any other obvious path (i.e. simpler). g-)
Sorry, Paul
On Apr 11, 2005 4:46 AM, Greger V. Teigre greger@teigre.com wrote: After my last email, I looked at ktcpvs and realized I ignored a couple of things: ktcpvs only supports tcp (http is obviously tcp-based, but I thought it supported udp for other protocols). I don't know how much work implementing udp would be. Here is a discussion of SIP and LVS that I found useful (though not encouraging).
http://www.austintek.com/LVS/LVS-HOWTO/HOWTO/LVS-HOWTO.services_that_dont_wo...
Paul: I'm starting to get really curious on the standard LVS components used for your stickiness! I'm not aware (also after searching now) of an LVS balancing mechanism that allows correct stickness on SIP udp...! And I found other too who are looking for it:
http://archive.linuxvirtualserver.org/html/lvs-users/2005-02/msg00251.html
My understanding is that ipvs must be extended (according to the developer) with a call-id based scheduler and that this work has several people willing to fund development, but that this has not(?) started yet. The problem is that ipvs is based on ip header analysis and extending the hashing algorithms to also include payload-based analysis is not straight-forward. g-)
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
All,
AFAIK HSRP is proprietary to cisco and there are no implementations of hsrp on linux. I found vgpd (http://vgpd.freaknet.org/) which claims to be similar but not compatible with hsrp. Does anyone know of available implementations of vrrp or hsrp on linux(preferably redhat or fedora)?
Alex
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On Behalf Of maka Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 1:07 AM To: kramarv@yahoo.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: LVS, load balancing, and stickness was ==> Re: [Serusers] more usrloc synchronization
You are probably right. HSRP could actually be used for load balancing, as could VRRP (which is what I believe you mean by active/active) by defining multiple standby groups per interface with recirprocal priorities on the groups.
The same thing could be done with VRRP by using multiple virtual routers and reversing the priorities, but then one would need a different IP address for each of the VRIDs.
On 4/14/05, Tina kramarv@yahoo.com wrote:
As well as I am.
"Greger V. Teigre" greger@teigre.com wrote:
The only bright point I can offer here is that I'm 100% certain that the LVS source code has __not__ been modified.
Which really makes me annoyed, because I cannot right now see any other obvious path (i.e. simpler). g-)
Sorry, Paul
On Apr 11, 2005 4:46 AM, Greger V. Teigre greger@teigre.com wrote: After my last email, I looked at ktcpvs and realized I ignored a couple of things: ktcpvs only supports tcp (http is obviously tcp-based, but I thought it supported udp for other protocols). I don't know how much work implementing udp would be. Here is a discussion of SIP and LVS that I found useful (though not encouraging).
http://www.austintek.com/LVS/LVS-HOWTO/HOWTO/LVS-HOWTO.services_that_dont_wo rk_yet.html
Paul: I'm starting to get really curious on the standard LVS components used for your stickiness! I'm not aware (also after searching now) of an LVS balancing mechanism that allows correct stickness on SIP udp...! And I found other too who are looking for it:
http://archive.linuxvirtualserver.org/html/lvs-users/2005-02/msg00251.html
My understanding is that ipvs must be extended (according to the developer) with a call-id based scheduler and that this work has several people willing to fund development, but that this has not(?) started yet. The problem is that ipvs is based on ip header analysis and extending the hashing algorithms to also include payload-based analysis is not straight-forward. g-)
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
_______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-
Alex Vishnev -
maka -
Tina