Re: Multihome load balancing - kernel vs netfilter

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 02:48:01PM +0800, Salim S I wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luciano Ruete [mailto:luciano@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 11:28 AM
> To: Salim S I
> Cc: lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re:  Multihome load balancing - kernel vs netfilter
> >Is not about ego, sorry if you take this personal, it is not my
> intention, >i 
> >speak rude because this list get heavly indexed by google, and it is
> taked >as 
> >good advice for many answer seekers.
> >
> >You afirm that Linux cannot handle load balancing properly and this is 
> >completly WRONG and is bad advertising and a lie. 
> >
> >Since 2.4 series has been avaible the greats julian's patchs[1], and
> then >in 
> >2.6.12 CONNMARK has get in mainline, and with a litle of setup all
> >connection 
> >problems related to load balancing get perfectly solved.
> I did not say Linux can't do Load balancing (btw, my setup has Julian's
> DGD patch as well as CONNMARK). But there are some limitations to the
> popular methods currently used.
> 1.As Peter Rabbitson [rabbit@xxxxxxxxx] mentioned, one issue is the
> separate control and data servers. He mentions AIM servers as example.
> This probably can only be solved by having exception IP list. 
> 2.The other situation, and the one I am more concerned, is about
> different connections which belongs to same session.
> Consider Client X and Server Y. 
> Client X initiates a connection from port a to port b of server Y.
> Xa <---> Yb   This connection goes through WAN1.
> After sometime, X opens another connection to Y from port c to port d.
> Xc <---> Yd   This is a perfectly new TCP connection, so it may go
> through WAN2
> (Note that the client is NATed, and that no CONNTRACK exist for this
> app)
> The server may reject the second and subsequent connections as it comes
> in with a different source IP than the first.
> This situation happens often in IM and Gaming scenarios. Some sort of IP
> persistence is required to handle this. And I was wondering if recent
> match would solve this to an extent, without affecting performance. Or
> if there are some other method available. (Note that I can't depend much
> on cache).

Are all of these idioms of each method documented in the wiki ?

So what is the preferred method going forward ?

> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list
> LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

LARTC mailing list

[Bugtraq]     [Fedora Legacy]     [GCC Help]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [IP Tables]     [Netfilter Devel]     [Fedora Users]

Powered by Linux