Hello all,
The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation.
I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB) solution. The idea is this. Let us say I have a public facing load balancer machine with an public IP of, say, 50.50.50.50. It is to receive the traffic (let's say, HTTP traffic) and then route it to two private HTTP servers, let's say, 192.168.10.10 and 192.168.10.11. It has to have persistence - i.e., be state- and session-aware. If for whatever reason one of the servers goes down the remaining pool shares all the traffic in some fashion (be it eound robin, saturation based, whatever).
We have tried Vyatta ( http://vyatta.org/ ) and ZeroShell ( http://www.zeroshell.org/ ) and both are very good but their NLB seems to be externally facing (i.e., you have several internet connections and are trying to divide your traffic between them). What we need is an "internally facing" one, if I may say so.
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Boris.
Am 19.01.2013 um 21:35 schrieb Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com:
Hello all,
The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation.
I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB) solution. The idea is this. Let us say I have a public facing load balancer machine with an public IP of, say, 50.50.50.50. It is to receive the traffic (let's say, HTTP traffic) and then route it to two private HTTP servers, let's say, 192.168.10.10 and 192.168.10.11. It has to have persistence - i.e., be state- and session-aware. If for whatever reason one of the servers goes down the remaining pool shares all the traffic in some fashion (be it eound robin, saturation based, whatever).
We have tried Vyatta ( http://vyatta.org/ ) and ZeroShell ( http://www.zeroshell.org/ ) and both are very good but their NLB seems to be externally facing (i.e., you have several internet connections and are trying to divide your traffic between them). What we need is an "internally facing" one, if I may say so.
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
Did you check haproxy -> http://haproxy.1wt.eu.
Application session should be shared via distributed key-value store (e.g. redis). Speak another instance to manage.
-- LF
Leon,
Thanks!
Looks good - though seems to be highly specific. I will check it out.
Boris.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Leon Fauster leonfauster@googlemail.comwrote:
Am 19.01.2013 um 21:35 schrieb Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com:
Hello all,
The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation
will
be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation.
I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB) solution.
The
idea is this. Let us say I have a public facing load balancer machine
with
an public IP of, say, 50.50.50.50. It is to receive the traffic (let's
say,
HTTP traffic) and then route it to two private HTTP servers, let's say, 192.168.10.10 and 192.168.10.11. It has to have persistence - i.e., be state- and session-aware. If for whatever reason one of the servers goes down the remaining pool shares all the traffic in some fashion (be it
eound
robin, saturation based, whatever).
We have tried Vyatta ( http://vyatta.org/ ) and ZeroShell ( http://www.zeroshell.org/ ) and both are very good but their NLB seems
to
be externally facing (i.e., you have several internet connections and are trying to divide your traffic between them). What we need is an
"internally
facing" one, if I may say so.
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
Did you check haproxy -> http://haproxy.1wt.eu.
Application session should be shared via distributed key-value store (e.g. redis). Speak another instance to manage.
-- LF
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Am 19.01.2013 um 21:35 schrieb Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com:
Hello all,
The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation
will
be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation.
I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB) solution.
The
idea is this. Let us say I have a public facing load balancer machine
with
an public IP of, say, 50.50.50.50. It is to receive the traffic (let's
say,
HTTP traffic) and then route it to two private HTTP servers, let's say, 192.168.10.10 and 192.168.10.11. It has to have persistence - i.e., be state- and session-aware. If for whatever reason one of the servers goes down the remaining pool shares all the traffic in some fashion (be it
eound
robin, saturation based, whatever).
We have tried Vyatta ( http://vyatta.org/ ) and ZeroShell ( http://www.zeroshell.org/ ) and both are very good but their NLB seems
to
be externally facing (i.e., you have several internet connections and are trying to divide your traffic between them). What we need is an
"internally
facing" one, if I may say so.
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
I've had pretty good luck with Barracuda load balancers.. You can configure them to keep a user session on a single server, which is often desired, and spread new connections to other servers as they arrive. The only problem I had with them, ironically, was they would crash if I purchased their "Live Updates" feature. It's some sort of auto updating black-list service you can buy which helps protect the device and your resources. But after I disabled that, the device has been rock solid. Been working great since about 2006.
If life gives you lemons, keep them-- because hey.. free lemons. "~heart~ Sticker" fixer: http://microflush.org/stuff/stickers/heartFix.html
Joseph,
Thanks!
Did you mean this:
https://www.barracudanetworks.com/products/loadbalancer
But this looks like an integrated solution, hardware and software. I am just looking for the software part.
Boris.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Joseph Spenner joseph85750@yahoo.comwrote:
Am 19.01.2013 um 21:35 schrieb Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com:
Hello all,
The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation
will
be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation.
I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB) solution.
The
idea is this. Let us say I have a public facing load balancer machine
with
an public IP of, say, 50.50.50.50. It is to receive the traffic (let's
say,
HTTP traffic) and then route it to two private HTTP servers, let's say, 192.168.10.10 and 192.168.10.11. It has to have persistence - i.e., be state- and session-aware. If for whatever reason one of the servers
goes
down the remaining pool shares all the traffic in some fashion (be it
eound
robin, saturation based, whatever).
We have tried Vyatta ( http://vyatta.org/ ) and ZeroShell ( http://www.zeroshell.org/ ) and both are very good but their NLB seems
to
be externally facing (i.e., you have several internet connections and
are
trying to divide your traffic between them). What we need is an
"internally
facing" one, if I may say so.
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
I've had pretty good luck with Barracuda load balancers.. You can configure them to keep a user session on a single server, which is often desired, and spread new connections to other servers as they arrive. The only problem I had with them, ironically, was they would crash if I purchased their "Live Updates" feature. It's some sort of auto updating black-list service you can buy which helps protect the device and your resources. But after I disabled that, the device has been rock solid. Been working great since about 2006.
If life gives you lemons, keep them-- because hey.. free lemons. "~heart~ Sticker" fixer: http://microflush.org/stuff/stickers/heartFix.html _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
From: Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 5:10 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations
Joseph,
Thanks!
Did you mean this:
https://www.barracudanetworks.com/products/loadbalancer
But this looks like an integrated solution, hardware and software. I am just looking for the software part.
Boris.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Joseph Spenner joseph85750@yahoo.comwrote:
I've had pretty good luck with Barracuda load balancers.. You can configure them to keep a user session on a single server, which is often desired, and spread new connections to other servers as they arrive. The only problem I had with them, ironically, was they would crash if I purchased their "Live Updates" feature. It's some sort of auto updating black-list service you can buy which helps protect the device and your resources. But after I disabled that, the device has been rock solid. Been working great since about 2006.
Yes. It might be worth just getting the whole canned solution, though. It is Linux based. At the time, the thing was about $1800, which isn't really that bad, and it just works. There's a web interface to configure it, and it's relatively intuitive.
If life gives you lemons, keep them-- because hey.. free lemons. "~heart~ Sticker" fixer: http://microflush.org/stuff/stickers/heartFix.html
Absolutely. The solution seems really robust and the price is not bad.
In my case, however, this is not the answer as I need a solution that can be implemented in a whole variety of networks, including virtual ones.
Thanks anyways.
Boris.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Joseph Spenner joseph85750@yahoo.comwrote:
From: Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 5:10 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations
Joseph,
Thanks!
Did you mean this:
https://www.barracudanetworks.com/products/loadbalancer
But this looks like an integrated solution, hardware and software. I am just looking for the software part.
Boris.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Joseph Spenner <joseph85750@yahoo.com
wrote:
I've had pretty good luck with Barracuda load balancers.. You can configure them to keep a user session on a single server, which is often desired, and spread new connections to other servers as they arrive. The only problem I had with them, ironically, was they would crash if I purchased their "Live Updates" feature. It's some sort of auto updating black-list service you can buy which helps protect the device and your resources. But after I disabled that, the device has been rock solid. Been working great since about 2006.
Yes. It might be worth just getting the whole canned solution, though. It is Linux based. At the time, the thing was about $1800, which isn't really that bad, and it just works. There's a web interface to configure it, and it's relatively intuitive.
If life gives you lemons, keep them-- because hey.. free lemons. "~heart~ Sticker" fixer: http://microflush.org/stuff/stickers/heartFix.html _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
FYI - HAProxy is in EPEL, so it's a fairly easy installation to test. Especially in virtual environments... ;)
-I
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com wrote:
Absolutely. The solution seems really robust and the price is not bad.
In my case, however, this is not the answer as I need a solution that can be implemented in a whole variety of networks, including virtual ones.
Thanks anyways.
Boris.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Joseph Spenner <joseph85750@yahoo.com
wrote:
From: Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 5:10 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations
Joseph,
Thanks!
Did you mean this:
https://www.barracudanetworks.com/products/loadbalancer
But this looks like an integrated solution, hardware and software. I am just looking for the software part.
Boris.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Joseph Spenner <joseph85750@yahoo.com
wrote:
I've had pretty good luck with Barracuda load balancers.. You can configure them to keep a user session on a single server, which is
often
desired, and spread new connections to other servers as they arrive. The only problem I had with them, ironically, was they would crash if I purchased their "Live Updates" feature. It's some sort of auto
updating
black-list service you can buy which helps protect the device and your resources. But after I disabled that, the device has been rock solid. Been working great since about 2006.
Yes. It might be worth just getting the whole canned solution, though. It is Linux based. At the time, the thing was about $1800, which isn't really that bad, and it just works. There's a web interface to configure it, and it's relatively intuitive.
If life gives you lemons, keep them-- because hey.. free lemons. "~heart~ Sticker" fixer: http://microflush.org/stuff/stickers/heartFix.html _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all,
The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation.
I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB) solution. The idea is this. Let us say I have a public facing load balancer machine with an public IP of, say, 50.50.50.50. It is to receive the traffic (let's say, HTTP traffic) and then route it to two private HTTP servers, let's say, 192.168.10.10 and 192.168.10.11. It has to have persistence - i.e., be state- and session-aware. If for whatever reason one of the servers goes down the remaining pool shares all the traffic in some fashion (be it eound robin, saturation based, whatever).
We have tried Vyatta ( http://vyatta.org/ ) and ZeroShell ( http://www.zeroshell.org/ ) and both are very good but their NLB seems to be externally facing (i.e., you have several internet connections and are trying to divide your traffic between them). What we need is an "internally facing" one, if I may say so.
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Boris.
Add another vote for HAproxy. It's excellent at what it does, as long as it meets your requirements. It's main purpose is to load balance HTTP traffic, and it can maintain session using a cookie. It will monitor each server and remove it from rotation if it goes down. It also has methods to place servers into maintenance mode.
It doesn't really handle SSL (though they have been working on it for newer versions), but that can be handled by using Apache or nginx as the front-end termination point for SSL, and reverse proxy into haproxy.
It also does generic TCP load balancing, but I don't use it so can't comment on that.
❧ Brian Mathis
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Brian Mathis < brian.mathis+centos@betteradmin.com> wrote:
Add another vote for HAproxy. It's excellent at what it does, as long as it meets your requirements. It's main purpose is to load balance HTTP traffic, and it can maintain session using a cookie. It will monitor each server and remove it from rotation if it goes down. It also has methods to place servers into maintenance mode.
It doesn't really handle SSL (though they have been working on it for newer versions), but that can be handled by using Apache or nginx as the front-end termination point for SSL, and reverse proxy into haproxy.
It also does generic TCP load balancing, but I don't use it so can't comment on that.
Also throwing in my vote with HAProxy, as it meets all of the (thus-far listed) requirements of the OP. The TCP loadbalancing works great, similar to the HTTP balancing.
On 19/1/2013 10:35 μμ, Boris Epstein wrote:
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
Have you checked HAProxy (http://haproxy.1wt.eu)?
Nick
On 19/1/2013 10:35 μμ, Boris Epstein wrote:
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
Some reading that might help in making up your mind:
http://www.chinanetcloud.com/blog/load-balancing-haproxy-vs-nginx http://www.techopsguys.com/tag/netscaler/ http://blog.exceliance.fr/2012/09/10/how-to-get-ssl-with-haproxy-getting-rid... http://blog.exceliance.fr/2012/08/25/haproxy-varnish-and-the-single-hostname...
You'll undoubtedly find more material on the iNet, but I hope the above may serve as a starting point.
Good luck, Nick
Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/20/2013 10:12 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
You'll undoubtedly find more material on the iNet, but I hope the above may serve as a starting point.
The iNet? Wow, Apple's getting into everything these days... :)
I think he meant the Inet. <g>
Missed the beginning of this thread, but if this is about serious hardware load balancers, a few years ago, where I was working, we bought one from Radware - less expensive than F5, and a very nice box, very configurable.
ObBias: as I worked closely with the sales engineer setting it up, and got friendly with him, I'd be glad to get you in touch with him....
mark
On 1/23/2013 10:57 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/20/2013 10:12 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
You'll undoubtedly find more material on the iNet, but I hope the above may serve as a starting point.
The iNet? Wow, Apple's getting into everything these days... :)
I think he meant the Inet. <g>
Missed the beginning of this thread, but if this is about serious hardware load balancers, a few years ago, where I was working, we bought one from Radware - less expensive than F5, and a very nice box, very configurable.
ObBias: as I worked closely with the sales engineer setting it up, and got friendly with him, I'd be glad to get you in touch with him....
We're using a Foundry ServerIron. Works well for us.
But the OP was asking about a software load balancer.
On 1/23/2013 12:22 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/23/2013 10:57 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/20/2013 10:12 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
You'll undoubtedly find more material on the iNet, but I hope the above may serve as a starting point.
The iNet? Wow, Apple's getting into everything these days... :)
I think he meant the Inet. <g>
Missed the beginning of this thread, but if this is about serious hardware load balancers, a few years ago, where I was working, we bought one from Radware - less expensive than F5, and a very nice box, very configurable.
ObBias: as I worked closely with the sales engineer setting it up, and got friendly with him, I'd be glad to get you in touch with him....
We're using a Foundry ServerIron. Works well for us.
But the OP was asking about a software load balancer.
I am a little late to the party on this one. So please excuse me if someone else has recommended HAproxy. I have been using it in a few production deployments, running it in a VM. Has been rock solid.
Στις 23-01-2013 16:25, Bowie Bailey έγραψε:
On 1/20/2013 10:12 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
You'll undoubtedly find more material on the iNet, but I hope the above may serve as a starting point.
The iNet? Wow, Apple's getting into everything these days... :)
A clear indication of loosing sight of core competences. Isn't it?
You can try Zen Load Balancer
http://www.zenloadbalancer.com/
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:20 PM, andreas andreas@cymail.eu wrote:
Στις 23-01-2013 16:25, Bowie Bailey έγραψε:
On 1/20/2013 10:12 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
You'll undoubtedly find more material on the iNet, but I hope the above may serve as a starting point.
The iNet? Wow, Apple's getting into everything these days... :)
A clear indication of loosing sight of core competences. Isn't it? _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I have, thanks! That one works just fine.
Unfortunately, it does load balancing - and that is all. ClearOS, for instance, does a myriad of things but the kind of load balancer I want.
And I would like to have it all in one machine. That is another challenge I face.
Boris.
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:03 AM, ankush grover ankushcentos@gmail.comwrote:
You can try Zen Load Balancer
http://www.zenloadbalancer.com/
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:20 PM, andreas andreas@cymail.eu wrote:
Στις 23-01-2013 16:25, Bowie Bailey έγραψε:
On 1/20/2013 10:12 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
You'll undoubtedly find more material on the iNet, but I hope the above may serve as a starting point.
The iNet? Wow, Apple's getting into everything these days... :)
A clear indication of loosing sight of core competences. Isn't it? _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hello all,
Many thanks to everyone who responded with extremely helpful tips.
Reporting back that I implemented HAProxy on CentOS 6.3 and this works like a charm - after I worked out a couple of HAProxy kinks.
Boris.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all,
The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation.
I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB) solution. The idea is this. Let us say I have a public facing load balancer machine with an public IP of, say, 50.50.50.50. It is to receive the traffic (let's say, HTTP traffic) and then route it to two private HTTP servers, let's say, 192.168.10.10 and 192.168.10.11. It has to have persistence - i.e., be state- and session-aware. If for whatever reason one of the servers goes down the remaining pool shares all the traffic in some fashion (be it eound robin, saturation based, whatever).
We have tried Vyatta ( http://vyatta.org/ ) and ZeroShell ( http://www.zeroshell.org/ ) and both are very good but their NLB seems to be externally facing (i.e., you have several internet connections and are trying to divide your traffic between them). What we need is an "internally facing" one, if I may say so.
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Boris.
Pound Load Balancer is pretty good in my experience.
On 19 January 2013 20:35, Boris Epstein borepstein@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all,
The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation.
I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB) solution. The idea is this. Let us say I have a public facing load balancer machine with an public IP of, say, 50.50.50.50. It is to receive the traffic (let's say, HTTP traffic) and then route it to two private HTTP servers, let's say, 192.168.10.10 and 192.168.10.11. It has to have persistence - i.e., be state- and session-aware. If for whatever reason one of the servers goes down the remaining pool shares all the traffic in some fashion (be it eound robin, saturation based, whatever).
We have tried Vyatta ( http://vyatta.org/ ) and ZeroShell ( http://www.zeroshell.org/ ) and both are very good but their NLB seems to be externally facing (i.e., you have several internet connections and are trying to divide your traffic between them). What we need is an "internally facing" one, if I may say so.
Any advice on what may help us would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Boris. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-
andreas -
ankush grover -
Boris Epstein -
Bowie Bailey -
Brian Mathis -
Christopher Buckley -
Corey A Johnson -
Ian Forde -
Johnny Tan -
Joseph Spenner -
Leon Fauster -
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Nikolaos Milas -
Nux!