LVS, load balancing, and stickness was ==> Re: [Serusers] more usrloc synchronization

[Alex Vishnev]

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 at iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces at lists.iptel.org] On
Behalf Of maka
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 1:07 AM
To: kramarv at yahoo.com
Cc: serusers at 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 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> As well as I am. 
> 
> "Greger V. Teigre" <greger at 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 at 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 at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> 
> 
>

_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers at lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers