Hi all,
I'm currently getting my Centos working as a proxy (squid) on a 2 Mb bandwidth plan that's serving 20 users. it's all good though our need for speed is increasing by the day.
soon enough i'll be serving up to 60 user, hence the need to get higher bandwidth though here where the problem is.
as i'm using HDSL, 2 Mb is the highest plan available.
hence, i need to get 2 HDSL subscriptions, in other words 2 modems/IPs to work with.. ( 2 x 2 Mb)
the possibility to use routing table isn't feasible as these two ISP's would only be used for browsing, so routing destinations one way or the other isn't an option.
i have two initial thoughts to solve this hope you could straighten me out if they're wrong or suggest something better that your experience lead you to use:
1. setup Openvz on a centos box, get two templates up and running with squid setup on them. each one with a different IP.
Each template would be routed to one ISP, and both proxies would be used in child/parent proxy manner so i could use caching from both.
and i could split my users in half, 1 half would be using Squid#1 and the other using squid#2.
2. the same squid box have two Nics, with two IPs, one routed to each ISP, i get squid listening to port " 80" on both IPs, and same as above, half of my users would be running on IP#1 and the others on IP#2.
do all this make any sense? i'm seeking your help as both ideas does not seem very professional to me, and i doubt that's the optimal solution so any help would be greatly appreciated.
thanks ,
--Roland _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Roland RoLaNd r_o_l_a_n_d@hotmail.com wrote:
i have two initial thoughts to solve this hope you could straighten me out if they're wrong or suggest something better that your experience lead you to use:
- setup Openvz on a centos box, get two templates up and running with
squid setup on them. each one with a different IP.
Each template would be routed to one ISP, and both proxies would be used in child/parent proxy manner so i could use caching from both.
and i could split my users in half, 1 half would be using Squid#1 and the other using squid#2.
- the same squid box have two Nics, with two IPs, one routed to each
ISP, i get squid listening to port " 80" on both IPs, and same as above, half of my users would be running on IP#1 and the others on IP#2.
I would suggest you put the Proxy box behind a "load balancing" router [1] and let the router handle the traffic to the 2 ISPs, if all you are doing is outbound traffic from LAN to WAN ('Net).
[1] Google search "linux load balance router" This particular looks promising YMMV depending on your network setup and objectives. http://blog.taragana.com/index.php/archive/how-to-load-balancing-failover-with-dual-multi-wan-adsl-cable-connections-on-linux
Best, -- Arun Khan
Am 27.06.2010 um 12:36 schrieb Arun Khan:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Roland RoLaNd <r_o_l_a_n_d@hotmail.com
wrote:
i have two initial thoughts to solve this hope you could straighten me out if they're wrong or suggest something better that your experience lead you to use:
- setup Openvz on a centos box, get two templates up and running
with squid setup on them. each one with a different IP.
Each template would be routed to one ISP, and both proxies would be used in child/parent proxy manner so i could use caching from both.
and i could split my users in half, 1 half would be using Squid#1 and the other using squid#2.
- the same squid box have two Nics, with two IPs, one routed to each
ISP, i get squid listening to port " 80" on both IPs, and same as above, half of my users would be running on IP#1 and the others on IP#2.
I would suggest you put the Proxy box behind a "load balancing" router [1] and let the router handle the traffic to the 2 ISPs, if all you are doing is outbound traffic from LAN to WAN ('Net).
[1] Google search "linux load balance router" This particular looks promising YMMV depending on your network setup and objectives. <http://blog.taragana.com/index.php/archive/how-to-load-balancing-failover-wi...
Or better just download pfSense ( http://www.pfsense.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=58&... ) and use it's Outbound Load-Balancing Feature: http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/MultiWanVersion1.2
Haven't used that particular feature, though.
That said, it could certainly also be achieved with CentOS (above tutorial), but good luck getting CentOS working on an embedded platform like ALIX... And for 2MBit, you don't even need an ALIX, the previous generation WRAP would be more than enough. (unless you need fast access to something in the DMZ) Wasting a full-blown PC/server on one or two 2 MBit lines is certainly overkill.
Rainer
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Rainer Duffner rainer@ultra-secure.de wrote:
Or better just download pfSense ( http://www.pfsense.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=58&... ) and use it's Outbound Load-Balancing Feature: http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/MultiWanVersion1.2
Haven't used that particular feature, though.
That said, it could certainly also be achieved with CentOS (above tutorial), but good luck getting CentOS working on an embedded platform like ALIX... And for 2MBit, you don't even need an ALIX, the previous generation WRAP would be more than enough. (unless you need fast access to something in the DMZ) Wasting a full-blown PC/server on one or two 2 MBit lines is certainly overkill.
I was not suggesting a PC server to do load balancing - indeed it is an overkill. An older PC with 2 NICs could do the job quite well (keep one standy) if 'Net connectivity is mission critical; roll your own with any Linux distro as some else has pointed to the LARTC project.
In the Pfsense product space, there are other solutions (e.g. vyatta, voyage linux, clearos, ebox - the latter two being a bit on the heavy side) that work well with embedded boards [1]; Or go for an off the shelf solution. IIRC, netgear has router models that do load balancing - cost under US$500.
[1] but limited success using them on the Atom motherboards.
-- Arun Khan
Hello,
Thank you Jerry.
I think FreeBSD is good OS too. But we prefer CentOS for compatibility with Red Hat.
When we decide to use CentOS, we will have a talk with CentOS project team about donation.
Regards, Shinobu Takasugi
------------------------------------------------------ On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:14:35AM +0900, Shinobu Takasugi wrote:
Hello,
I've sent this mail when I didn't subscribe this mailing list. Now I subscribe and I sent again. I'm sorry to bother you.
Our company make and sell some measurement system controlled by PC. We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux on the PC currently. We are thinking CentOS is another option for us. There is no technical issue but we don't have enough information about license.
We will do the following,
- Install CentOS and our applications on the PC.
- Sell the PC to our customer.
- Distribute DVD made from CentOS iso image file to our customer.
Question 1 Is there no problem from the view point of CentOS license?
I don't think there is a problem using CentOS that way.
Another option might be FreeBSD. (See http://www.freebsd.org/) There is definitely no problem with their license and it is a very good server OS.
Question 2 Should we donate to CentOS community?
Of course, donations are always appropriate, especially if you are making money from the product. But, it is not a legal requirement. Same is true of FreeBSD.
In FAQ http://www.centos.org/modules/smartfaq/faq.php?faqid=49, there is a description concerning donation when CentOS is used for business.
If CentOS is the basis of your business, you should also consider making monthly donations to the CentOS Project, or even providing a dedicated server for our use.
Best Regards, Shinobu Takasugi --
CentOS mailing list CentOS at centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 02:15:46PM +0900, Shinobu Takasugi wrote:
Hello,
Thank you Jerry.
I think FreeBSD is good OS too. But we prefer CentOS for compatibility with Red Hat.
I use both. I like FreeBSD somewhat better, but because of the closeness to RHEL, some things are more convenient in CentOS. But, for ease of licensing, FreeBSD wins.
////jerry
When we decide to use CentOS, we will have a talk with CentOS project team about donation.
Regards, Shinobu Takasugi
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:14:35AM +0900, Shinobu Takasugi wrote:
Hello,
I've sent this mail when I didn't subscribe this mailing list. Now I subscribe and I sent again. I'm sorry to bother you.
Our company make and sell some measurement system controlled by PC. We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux on the PC currently. We are thinking CentOS is another option for us. There is no technical issue but we don't have enough information about license.
We will do the following,
- Install CentOS and our applications on the PC.
- Sell the PC to our customer.
- Distribute DVD made from CentOS iso image file to our customer.
Question 1 Is there no problem from the view point of CentOS license?
I don't think there is a problem using CentOS that way.
Another option might be FreeBSD. (See http://www.freebsd.org/) There is definitely no problem with their license and it is a very good server OS.
Question 2 Should we donate to CentOS community?
Of course, donations are always appropriate, especially if you are making money from the product. But, it is not a legal requirement. Same is true of FreeBSD.
In FAQ http://www.centos.org/modules/smartfaq/faq.php?faqid=49, there is a description concerning donation when CentOS is used for business.
If CentOS is the basis of your business, you should also consider making monthly donations to the CentOS Project, or even providing a dedicated server for our use.
Best Regards, Shinobu Takasugi --
CentOS mailing list CentOS at centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Greetings,
On 6/27/10, Roland RoLaNd r_o_l_a_n_d@hotmail.com wrote:
I'm currently getting my Centos working as a proxy (squid) on a 2 Mb bandwidth plan that's serving 20 users. it's all good though our need for speed is increasing by the day.
soon enough i'll be serving up to 60 user, hence the need to get higher bandwidth though here where the problem is.
as i'm using HDSL, 2 Mb is the highest plan available.
hence, i need to get 2 HDSL subscriptions, in other words 2 modems/IPs to work with.. ( 2 x 2 Mb)
Did you check out the LARTC? (lartc.org)
Or to be more specific, perhaps perusing section 4.2. Routing for multiple uplinks/providers (http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html) could help matters further...
Regards,
Rajagopal
-
Arun Khan -
Jerry McAllister -
Rainer Duffner -
Rajagopal Swaminathan -
Roland RoLaNd -
Shinobu Takasugi