CSS arrowpoint cookie load balancing issue

Hi guys,
I need some advice on a load balancing issue.
We have connections hitting the CSS via a proxy environment. As a result i see only one source ip address. I want to use arrowpoint cookies for session stickeyness. However when i enable the rule the tcp session negotiation fails. The CSS sends a TCP/RST which terminates the session.
Here's the rule config:
content HTTP_rule
add service ZSTS299102
add service ZSTS281101
vip address <filtered>
add service LONS299102
add service LONS281101
balance weightedrr
change service ZSTS299102 weight 5
change service ZSTS281101 weight 5
advanced-balance arrowpoint-cookie
protocol tcp
port 80
url "/*"
active
Any help would be much appreciated.

Remko,
in L3/L4 the CSS sends the SYN directly to the server.
So when the FIN comes in, we simply pass it to the server.
With L5 the CSS spoofs the connection and we select the server only after receiving the GET.
If there was some delay between the GET and the FIN, the CSS would have time to establish a connection with the server and the FIN could be simply forwarded.
Unfortunately, in this case the FIN is right after the GET with no delay.
Gilles.

Similar Messages

ITS load balancing issue

Hi all,
During our testing we are getting a load balancing issue. However, one of the agates in our network is has more CPU power than compared to the other agates in our ITS network. The memory on all the agate servers is the same.
Our current issue we are getting is the one agate that has more cpu power but acquires more sessions as compared to the other two agates. It roughly gets 60 more sessions per agate process as compare to the other Agate servers. Does having more cpu on a Agate affect the load balancing on ITS? We are on ITS patch level 19 with the Hotfix.
Thanks,
Jin Bae

Hello Jin,
yes, at (re)initialize the WGate retrieves the capacity from the AGates.
This is an accumulated number based on CPU performance and the number of CPUs!
The number can be seen in "wgate-status" as the "Capacity" of the AGate.
When running multiprocess Agates the number is retrieved from the MManager and also involves the number of agate-processes.
The WGate dispatches the load in proportion depending on these capacity numbers.
By my knowledge there is no way that these values can be configured (fixed).
Regards,
Fekke

SIP load balancing issue with ACE 4710

SIP Load balancing Issue with ACE 4710
I have a Cisco ace 4710 with vesion Version A4(2.2). i configued simple SIP load balancing first without stickiness. without stikeiness we are having a problem because bye packet at the was not going to the same server all the time that left our port in used even though user hang up the phone. its happen randmly. i have a total 20 licenced ports and its fill out very quickly. so i dicided to use the stickiness with call-ID but still same issue. below is the config
rserver host CIN-VOX-31
ip address 172.20.130.31
inservice
rserver host CIN-VOX-32
ip address 172.20.130.32
inservice
serverfarm host CIN-VOX
probe SIP-5060
rserver CIN-VOX-31
    inservice
rserver CIN-VOX-32
    inservice
sticky sip-header Call-ID VOX_SIP_GROUP
timeout 1
timeout activeconns
replicate sticky
serverfarm CIN-VOX
class-map match-all CIN_VOX_L4_CLASS
2 match virtual-address 172.22.12.30 any
class-map match-all CIN_VOX_SIP_L4_CLASS
2 match virtual-address 172.22.12.30 udp eq sip
policy-map type loadbalance sip first-match CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
class class-default
    sticky-serverfarm VOX_SIP_GROUP
policy-map multi-match GLOBAL_DMZ_POLICY
   class CIN_VOX_SIP_L4_CLASS
    loadbalance vip inservice
    loadbalance policy CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
    loadbalance vip icmp-reply
class CIN_VOX_L4_CLASS
    loadbalance vip inservice
    loadbalance policy CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
    loadbalance vip icmp-reply
interface vlan 20
description VIP_DMZ_VLAN
ip address 172.22.12.4 255.255.255.192
alias 172.22.12.3 255.255.255.192
peer ip address 172.22.12.5 255.255.255.192
access-group input PERMIT-ANY-LB
service-policy input GLOBAL_DMZ_POLICY
could you please help me on this...
thanks
Rakesh Patel

I mean there should be one more statement-
class-map type sip loadbalance match-any CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
match sip header Call_ID header-value sip:
and that will be called under-
policy-map multi-match GLOBAL_DMZ_POLICY
   class CIN_VOX_SIP_L4_CLASS
    loadbalance vip inservice
    loadbalance policy CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
    loadbalance vip icmp-reply
is that missing in your config ?

CSS load balancing issue

Hi,
I'm facing a problem with CSS while load balaning for the web application with two servers.
The application is based on activex..
Basically I have two servers running web application for which I have created VIP in the CSS, user hits the VIP address and they access the application, also we use the sticky thing as the application requires the session persistence.. everything is fine, but the problem starts when one of the server fails...
Assume a user hits the VIP address and access the application, due to the sticky thing his session will be with server A (for eg.), now suddenly the server A fails and in that time the user was doing a transcation and inputting some data and after that he press the submit button on the page, as the server A is down the web page gets refreshed and he has to relogin to the application and redo the whole thing what he was doing in that particular transcation...
Now the application guys are telling this problem should not happen as the CSS should be able to take care of the session getting reestablished to the other server B during the server A failure...
Can someone through some lights on this... I'm bit confused now... as what I understand is that the webpage gets refreshed during a server failure because the tcp session id will get changed and the server B will not accept the same tcp session so it reinitiates the new session...
Is my understanding right?? or is there something which we can do on the CSS to avoid this problem...
Regards
Vijay.

Hi Gilles,
Thanks for the clarification.
I have two more issues too...
1. The load balancing of the application between the two servers are not even. Actually the traffic from the users keep hitting only one server, I understand the point of sticky method used in our case, but even atleast the connection from another client machine should go to the other server,but it is not the case... traffic from all the clients goes to only one server..
what could be the possible reason for the same...
My config is as below...
service SERVER-1
port 80
protocol tcp
keepalive port 80
keepalive type tcp
redundant-index 4
ip address 10.6.223.87
active
service SERVER-2
port 80
protocol tcp
keepalive port 80
keepalive type tcp
ip address 10.6.223.77
redundant-index 5
active
owner WEB
content WEB
add service SERVER-1
add service SERVER-2
redundant-index 104
vip address 10.6.223.78
protocol tcp
port 80
url "/webretrieve*"
advanced-balance sticky-srcip
active
2. Slow response of the application when users access application through VIP address(CSS), what can be done further in the configuration to improve the performance?? or any thing else I can do...
Regards

CSS 11501 Load Balancing Issue

Hi,
We are facing some issue in load balancing in cisco CSS 11501 as we are not able to access the application through virtual IP. Below is the ruuning configuration of the CSS:
CSS11501# sh running-config
!Generated on 10/06/2010 16:51:34
!Active version: sg0810106
configure
!*************************** GLOBAL ***************************
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 132.186.199.1 1
!************************** CIRCUIT **************************
circuit VLAN1
ip address 132.186.199.145 255.255.255.0
!************************** SERVICE **************************
service Server1
ip address 132.186.199.243
port 5001
protocol tcp
keepalive port 5001
active
service Server2
ip address 132.186.199.246
protocol tcp
port 5001
keepalive port 5001
active
!*************************** OWNER ***************************
owner L5_Owner
content L3_Rule
    vip address 132.186.199.146
    protocol tcp
    port 5001
    add service Server1
    add service Server2
    active
content L5_Rule
    vip address 132.186.199.146
    add service Server1
    add service Server2
    protocol tcp
    port 5001
    url "//132.186.199.146:5001/emi"
    active
CSS11501#
Observation : We are able to telnet on VIP: 132.186.199.146 on port 5001, but not able to access the application.
In Actual scenarion customer access application by accessing URL: http://132.186.199.243:5001/emi and once he enter this URL in web browser the request redirects ( by server itself) to URL: https://132.186.199.44:6002/cas/login?service=http%3A%2F%2F132.186.199.243%3A5001%2Femi%2Findex.jsp&acceptStrength=BASIC on backend server for user authenticaton and once user is authenticated then it again redirect to main URL ( http://132.186.199.243:5001/emi ) to access the application but when we are trying to access the application through VIP ( URL: http://132.186.199.146:5001/emi) we are not getting the login page as the request is not gettting redirected to backend server for user authentication.
Please suggest a solution here.

The problem is that you are in one-armed mode.
So you need to configure client nat.
Without nating the client ip address, the server response goes back directly to the client and bypasses the CSS.
Therefore the client receives a response from an unknown server ip address (not the vip).
So configure a group.
For example
group Client
    vip address 132.186.199.146
    add destination service Server1
     add destination service Server2
    active
Also, remove the url command from your content rule.
It is useless in your case and will just make performance worst.
Gilles.

CSS load balancing issue: url isn't accessible even though services are up

service Server1:80
ip address 10.10.10.34
protocol tcp
port 80
keepalive type http
keepalive uri "/test.asp"
active
service Server2:80
protocol tcp
port 80
keepalive type http
keepalive uri "/test.asp"
ip address 10.10.10.35
active
owner Ow1
content LBR1:80
    vip address 192.168.1.159
    port 80
    protocol tcp
    url "/*"
    balance weightedrr
    add service Server1:80
    add service Server2:80
    advanced-balance sticky-srcip
    sticky-inact-timeout 21
    flow-timeout-multiplier 8
    active
service Server1:80
ip address 10.10.10.34
protocol tcp
port 80
keepalive type http
keepalive uri "/test.asp"
active
service Server2:80
protocol tcp
port 80
keepalive type http
keepalive uri "/test.asp"
ip address 10.10.10.35
active
owner OW1
content LBR2:80
    vip address 192.168.1.98
    protocol tcp
    port 80
    url "/*"
    balance weightedrr
    add service Server1:80
    add service Server2:80
    advanced-balance sticky-srcip
    sticky-inact-timeout 21
    flow-timeout-multiplier 8
    active
All services are alive all the time and both contexts are alive all the time.
when user tries to access LBR2:80's URL it works all the time. but when user tries to access LBR1:80's url then it works sometimes and some times it doesn't work.
could you advise what the issue could be?

When the SYN comes in the CSS will first check for the srcip in the sticky database and if it finds a match will forward to the stuck server. If the source ip is not in the sticky database the request will be load balanced using weightedrr and a server selected. That sticky server will then be added to the sticky database.
If the sticky-srcip is used between 2 content rule, it will use separate sticky table.
You may need to take packet capture to understand what is really failing along with
a following outputs :
sh flow
sh rule Ow1 LBR1:80 ser
regards
Andrew

CSS11500 Load Balancing issue

Hi all,
I using the CSS 11500 sg0750004 (07.50.0.04) to balacing requests between two web application servers, but the after applied the configurations, the balancing requests don't occurs as expect, see the configuration applied:
service SAPSRV1_8000
ip address 192.215.13.44
protocol tcp
keepalive method get
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 8000
keepalive frequency 30
port 8000
string sapsrv1
active
service SAPSRV2_8000
ip address 192.215.13.45
protocol tcp
keepalive method get
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 8000
keepalive frequency 30
port 8000
string sapsrv2
active
content SAPSRVS_8000
    add service SAPSRV1_8000
    add service SAPSRV2_8000
    vip address 192.215.13.40
    advanced-balance cookies
    string process-length 7
    no persistent
    protocol tcp
    port 8000
    url "/*"
    string prefix "sap-hostid="
    string range 1 to 1999
    active
group SAPSRV1_SAPSRV2Servers
add destination service SAPSRV1_8000
add destination service SAPSRV2_8000
vip address 192.215.13.40
active
So, the VIP Address is exclusively to the group service and the tcp port also is exclusively.
Could you please assist me, why the load balancing doesn't running correctly?
Case need more information, please let me know.
Thank you in advanced.
Sergio Lima

Hello Sergio,
Can you please elaborate on the issues you are experiencing? When you mention the VIP is not working as expected is that due to the fact that the connection simply hangs? Is the CSS actually balancing the inbound traffic? Or is it successfully balancing the traffic, but not maintaining session persistence based on the server-side cookie? Do you know if the session cookie will be embedded within the HTTP header or the URL string? If you are unsure you can always change the "advanced-balance" method to "cookie-url". Can you ping the VIP address?
Also, can you confirm that the server-side cookie should be located directly after the following name "sap-hostid="?
Ex:
sap-hostid=sapsrv1
The reason why I ask is you do not have a string skip-length defined so the CSS will attempt to locate the server-side cookie string after the prefix.
Also, have you verified the services have passed their keep-alive check? This can be performed by running the following command:
show service-summary
Both of the services should "alive" on their keep-alive check.
Also, on your service configuration you do not require the "keepalive method get" command since the services are setup to perform a tcp socket connection for their keep-alive check and not a keepalive type of http to a URI page.
service SAPSRV1_8000
ip address 192.215.13.44
protocol tcp
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 8000
keepalive frequency 30
port 8000
string sapsrv1
active
service SAPSRV2_8000
ip address 192.215.13.45
protocol tcp
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 8000
keepalive frequency 30
port 8000
string sapsrv2
active
Also, based on the service and content rule configuration it would seem as though your CSS has been deployed in Bridged Mode (single Circuit VLAN). That being said, the Group Rule will allow users from the 192.215.13.0/24 network to establish a port 8000 connection to the 192.215.13.40 VIP. However, please be advised external clients establishing a connection to the 192.215.13.40 VIP will "appear" as the .40 VIP address within the destination server logs. The CSS will SNAT the inbound client traffic and masquerade their true source address as the VIP. Unfortunately, the CSS does not support the X-Forwarded-For HTTP header option. However, this can be bypassed through the use of ACLs on the CSS.
- Jason

Siebel Testing. Cookie handling, cookie load balancing and authentication.

We are delivering a PoC in a big Siebel customer and we are finding some issues.
Environment information is:
- Siebel testing, version 8.
- NTLM Windows authentication.
     When we create a Siebel Load script, recording works fine. Replaying the script, after adding the Authentication function, does not work
     When we create a Web Load Script with the same structure and business process, after adding the Authentication function, it works.
     Looking at the difference between Web and Siebel scripts, only difference are a couple of cookies that Web script considers and Siebel does not. This two cookies are added in the second call of the NTLM handshake requests (two requests with 401 http code and a final with a 200 http code). The application, in the first NTLM handshake request, ask the browser to add a couple of cookies that the browser (and OLT in a web load script) add. Siebel load script does not add/handle this cookies.
     Accordingly, the script works with web module but does not work with Siebel module.
Right now we only have two options to make Siebel work:
- Change the DNS address to point to a single node for the application, instead of pointing to the load balancing service. This way, cookies are not needed and the script does not fail.
- Add the cookies by hand. This way, cookie content is "hardcoded" and, so, it will not be useful for load balancing purposes, which lead us to previous bullet. Load testing using Siebel will not work load balanced.
I added a web script (works fine with no tweaking) and a Siebel script executed with normal configuration (does not work) and workaround (avoiding the load balancing cookies- it works).
Many thanks for the help,
Iván.
IM_Siebel_Second_Test.zip
Siebel web test.zip
Edited by: user9982485 on 03-Aug-2010 09:18

Álex,
Thank you a lot, I will call you related to other issue also. Thanks for the kind help!.
IMHO, it works or not depending on cookies added for load balancing. Siebel module does not specifically add these cookies, while web module does. If you delete the cookies from the web module, it stops working, so I guess the cookies are making/breaking the script.
I will send you the scripts, so you can have a look.
Thanks,
Iván.

Load-balancing issues with iPlanet and multiple clusters

We're in performance test of a large-scale clustered deployment based on WLS 5.1sp10.
Due to scalability/functionality issues, some of which we've seen firsthand and
some of which we've been informed of by associates as well as BEA representatives,
we've chosen to implement multiple clusters with a maximum of three nodes each.
These clusters will be fronted by a web server tier consisting of iPlanet servers
using the proxy plugin.
Due to hardware constraints (both in test and in production), however, we've configured
the iPlanet servers to route across the multiple clusters. In our test environment,
for instance, we've got a single iPlanet server routing across two 3-node clusters,
and the configuration in obj.conf is as follows:
<Object name="application" ppath="*/application">
Service fn="wl-proxy" \
WebLogicCluster="clusterA_1:9990,clusterB_1:9991,clusterA_2:9990,clusterB_2:9991,clusterA_3:9990,
clusterB_3:9991" \
CookieName="ApplicationSession"
</Object>
Our issue is that the load-balancing doesn't appear to work across the clusters.
We're seeing one cluster get about 90% of the load, while the other receives
only 10%.
So, the question (finally!) is: Is this configuration correct (i.e., will it
work according to the logic of the proxy plugin), and is it appropriate for this
situation? Are there other alternative approaches that anyone can recommend?
Thanks in advance,
cramer

I use weblogic6.1 with sp2+windows 2000.I develop a web application and deploy
it to cluster.Through HttpClusterServlets proxy of weblogic I found that a server
in cluster almost get 95% of requests but another only get 5% of requests.Why???
I don't set any special parameter.And the weight of the two clustered server is
equal.I use round-robin arithmetic.
Thanks!
"cramer" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
We're in performance test of a large-scale clustered deployment based
on WLS 5.1sp10.
Due to scalability/functionality issues, some of which we've seen firsthand
and
some of which we've been informed of by associates as well as BEA representatives,
we've chosen to implement multiple clusters with a maximum of three nodes
each.
These clusters will be fronted by a web server tier consisting of iPlanet
servers
using the proxy plugin.
Due to hardware constraints (both in test and in production), however,
we've configured
the iPlanet servers to route across the multiple clusters. In our test
environment,
for instance, we've got a single iPlanet server routing across two 3-node
clusters,
and the configuration in obj.conf is as follows:
<Object name="application" ppath="*/application">
Service fn="wl-proxy" \
WebLogicCluster="clusterA_1:9990,clusterB_1:9991,clusterA_2:9990,clusterB_2:9991,clusterA_3:9990,
clusterB_3:9991" \
CookieName="ApplicationSession"
</Object>
Our issue is that the load-balancing doesn't appear to work across the
clusters.
We're seeing one cluster get about 90% of the load, while the other
receives
only 10%.
So, the question (finally!) is: Is this configuration correct (i.e.,
will it
work according to the logic of the proxy plugin), and is it appropriate
for this
situation? Are there other alternative approaches that anyone can recommend?
Thanks in advance,
cramer

Could not retrieve Enterprise Global Template - Load balancer issue

Hi,
We have 4 Project Server 2010 servers. The 4 web servers are load balanced by networking team with sticky session configured.
When we try to connect to the Project Server using MPP 2007 SP2, it fails saying 'Could not retrieve Enterprise Global template'. It works perfect when we point to a specific server by specifying the IP address for server name in the 'hosts'
file.
Earlier we observed some errors in the event viewer related to the SharePoint's internal load balancer for which restarted the 'Project Server Application' on each web server and it got fixed.
Now, the only entries that we see related to load balancer are as mentioned below as Information (not errors).
SharePoint Web Services Round Robin Service Load Balancer Event: Initialization
Process Name: w3wp
Process ID: 15080
AppDomain Name: /LM/W3SVC/539065287/ROOT-1-130462463500778047
AppDomain ID: 2
Service Application Uri: urn:schemas-microsoft-com:sharepoint:service:ae7c7ee5c09b4e8198bdbb1ecb8c1c1b#authority=urn:uuid:9f626d347784423eb14bde4a1f4d13fc&authority=https://lonms12546:32844/Topology/topology.svc
Active Endpoints: 4
Failed Endpoints:0
Endpoint List:
http://lonxxx2532:32843/ae7c7ee5c09b4e8198bdbb1ecb8c1c1b/PSI
http://lonxxx2545:32843/ae7c7ee5c09b4e8198bdbb1ecb8c1c1b/PSI
http://lonxxx2546:32843/ae7c7ee5c09b4e8198bdbb1ecb8c1c1b/PSI
http://lonxxx2566:32843/ae7c7ee5c09b4e8198bdbb1ecb8c1c1b/PSI
Could the issue be due to network load balancer?
Could the issue be due to Sticky session configuration on the load balancer.?
How can we get to the root cause of the issue?
Which logging category should we set to 'Verbose' that can give us some hint.
Update: We tried to capture the requests through fiddler and observed that when fiddler is running on the client computer then the connection works perfectly fine even through the load balancer. Probably fiddler is reformatting the SOAP
envelop of the web service requests the way it should before sending the request to the server.
If we do not run fiddler and run some other similar tool (like Charles) then it again gives the issue and the request stucks at /PWA/_vti_bin/psi/winproj.asmx
We ran Wireshark on the servers and found the following for that web service call:
[TCP Previous segment not captured] Continuation or non-HTTP traffic.
Please let me know if someone could provide any hint what can be done next.
Regards, Amit Gupta

There are several ways to configure your load balancer. I would suggest that you work with the network engineer, the load balancer vendor and your project administrator to resolve this issue.
Basically you need URL to be resolved correctly. Also, I don't believe PS2007 did a good job handling load balancing, so you may need to bring someone in good with IIS and see they can tweek IIS to manage the cache better.
As I go back and look at your analysis, I think you should probably look at upgrading to Project Server 2013. They made some improvement in load balancing and the management of distributive cache.
I assume you have 4 WFE because you have thousands of project users. Roughly how many you have? Over 1000, over 5000
Have you tried to see if using two load balancing work? How about just one front end. I often see companies scaling SharePoint and Project server to extremes.
Michael Wharton, MVP, MBA, PMP, MCT, MCTS, MCSD, MCSE+I, MCDBA
Website http://www.WhartonComputer.com
Blog http://MyProjectExpert.com contains my field notes and SQL queries

Cisco ACE20 Load balancing issues

Dear All,
I have a problem with the ACE 20 load balance
To start with following is our architectural request flow:
Load Balancer --> Webseal /(reverse proxy) --> HTTP Server --> Portal Server
We have Hardware Load Balancer Cisco ACE20.
When we access our portal from Webseal server it works totally fine without any issue, but when we access the same application using ACE we face the following issues:
1) Some of the links on do not work. For eg: We have a link "subscribe" which points to https://intranet/abc/wps/portal/subscription , whenever we click on this link, the request is directed to https://intranet/abc/wps/portal i.e homepage
2) URL redirection does not work We have some links which have a url forwarding or redirection for example when we open https://intranet/ef/quickplace it forwards the requests to https://intranet/ef/quickplace/Main.nsf?opendocument....., but this redirection fails and again the request is thrown to homepage i.e https://intranet/abc/wps/portal
3) The response of the request and the overall portal when accessed via ACE is very sluggish and it takes 20 seconds for homepage to load, whereas the homepage loads in 4 secs when accessed via webseal.
below is the ACE details. Kindly provide the your inputs to resolve this issue. will rate all the suggestions
Hardware Product Number: ACE20-MOD-K9
Card Index:     207
Hardware Rev:   2.3
Feature Bits:   0000 0002
Slot No. :      7
Type:           ACE
Software
loader:    Version 12.2[120]
system:    Version A2(1.4) [build 3.0(0)A2(1.4) adbuild_11:54:12-2009/03/05_/a
uto/adbu-rel2/rel_a2_1_4_throttle/REL_3_0_0_A2_1_4]
system image file: [LCP] disk0:c6ace-t1k9-mz.A2_1_4.bin
installed license: ACE-SEC-LIC-K9

Dear all,
Please suggest on this issue.
BS

JSF and load balancing issues

Hello,
We are having a difficult time getting our app to work correctly on our load balanced system. Any help / suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
We have a very basic load balancer which is in round robin mode (this cannot be changed), two separate vms, each with an instance of apache(2.0.54) and tomcat(6.0.14). Each apache talks only to the tomcat on the same vm and the tomcats are configured to session replicate with each other (which is happening).
When I log in to the app and start pressing a few buttons there are no problems for a little while. I then leave the screen idle for 1 minute and resume pressing buttons. The main session bean which holds information about where the user is and other key information, gets its constructor called and is set back to default and the page goes back to the main menu. Immediately before the bean is reset, the logs show the following:
[MyApp] 17 Jun 2009 15:33:27,514 WARN: [ajp-8009-2 LoggerListener.onApplicationEvent(60)] : Authentication event AuthenticationSuccessEvent: v; details: (etc etc removed…)This is what the two logs look like:
VM1 - Authentication event
VM2 - Main menu
VM2 - Presss a button – progress a screen
VM2 - Presss a button – progress a screen
VM2 - Presss a button – progress a screen
VM2 - Presss a button – progress a screen
[wait 1 min]
VM1 - Authentication event
VM1 - Bean reset
Processing continues, but screen is redirected to main menu
We have the distributable tag in the web.xml file and javax.faces.STATE_SAVING_METHOD is set to client. Its set to client as the app will not work at all with it set to server (keeps asking for the user to re-log in).
Thank you,
Victoria

Looks like a Tomcat issue to me. JSF is not going to timeout in 1 minute. You might want to check your Tomcat replication settings. Note try to do a very simple loadbalancing application that just echos the Tomcat is executing on.

Load Balancing Issues SOMEBODY HELP ME!!

Good Morning.
A few days ago we implemented Load Balancing in our company, I printed a step by step procedure from MS and just follow it thinking that once I did that everything was going to be ok, but I am some issues that I managed to fix, but now I am stock in one
that I just can't figure it out, here I go.
When regular users try to connect to the Farm using the external IP they can't connect, we checked firewall seems to be ok, we check the configuration we did and we didn't miss any step, NOW here is the crazy part, when we use our Admin ID we can connect,
so I thought maybe is an Active Directory thing, but I don't know where to look or what to do so my questions are,
Can this be a licensing issue?
Do I have to have my TSBroker as part of my group of PC in the firewall?
Can it be a certificate issue? (not too sure because I can connect as an admin)
Can it be permissions to log in to the servers?
My co-worked is telling me now that if TS Broker sent them to TS1 they can connect but if TSBroker send them to the other two members of the farms they can't connect, TS1 is the original TS before this whole Load Balancing thing.
we tried so many solutions that we can find online and come up with and nothing seems to be working, so what do I do? What did I do wrong when I configure the Load balancing? is there any step beside what MS told me that I am missing...
PLEASE HELP!!
Thank you..

Hi Rodrigo,
Thank you for posting in Windows Server Forum.
What’s your server OS in your environment?
Firstly see that, if you have not set up RD Licensing server and don’t have RDS CAL then your administrator can only get access for RDP connection (only 2 connection for Admin purpose). Now if you want more than 2 connection you need to setup RD Licensing server,
activate it, purchase RDS CAL and install it. After installing, you need to see that your user have enough permission to access RDS server and your user must be added under “Remote Desktop User” local group under RDS Server.
As you have commented that your admin can able to connect so I think you must have the issue with user permission, please go through above points and check the result.
Please check below article for more details.
1. TS Session Broker Load Balancing Step-by-Step Guide (Server 2008)
2. Checklist: Create a Load-Balanced RD Session Host Server Farm by Using RD Connection Broker (Server 2008 R2)
Hope it helps!
Thanks.
Dharmesh Solanki

Load balancing issues?

Could someone help me with load balancing, current stats:
I have a limited understanding, but from what I can make out, we have a significant number of clients being denied association and load balancing to different AP's but then the candidate count suggests a significant number of clients that failed to load balance, presumably because there wasnt an AP available in range that wasn't busy?
Uptime is 27 days, client count can reach around 220 at busy times, 63 AP's in the building 1142's, 5508 controller. I am wondering if increasing the window size would offer a more robust solution, or will this just degrade user experience further?
I am having a number of issues with failed client association now, and devices just not being able to operate wirelessly at all
Client count reaching 25 on some AP's

I guess per radio per AP client count is more in your case, clients more than the threshold are being shown busy status ( code 17 ) by AP. Therefore, clients are unable to associate to that AP. When the number of retries are over , they are denied. I guess there are network holes as well ( no coverage b/w the cells of differenet APs ). You can increase the window count , however, it depends on the AP model finally ( max. no. of clients associated ).

CSS and Oracle Load Balancing

Hi,
I have CSS in single arm deployment model. I have multiple servers load balancing on this CSS on port 80 etc. Today I am trying to load balance one Oracle server but I am facing problem with it.
Real servers are accessible on port 80 without any problem but when we are trying to access the same servers on VIP we are not able to see the web page.
real server http://192.168.17.12/irs.htm
real server http://192.168.17.14/irs.htm
real server http://192.168.10.37/irs.htm
VIP
http://192.168.200.58/irs.htm
Below is the configuration. I can do the telnet on port 80 and I can ping the VIP IP address.
I will only put 192.168.200.58 in browser I can see the oracle page but with the full URL i am not able to see it.
Though I have other oracle servers which I have load balance with the same configuration and I can access the web page.
==========================================================================================
http://tptest.enoc.com/forms/frmservlet?config=tp (This is working fine).
========================================================================
http://irs.enoc.com/irs.htm (This is not working).
By name and by IP address both are not working.
http://192.168.200.58/irs.htm (This is not working).
=============================================================================
service IRC_1
ip address 192.168.17.12
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 80
active
service IRC_2
ip address 192.168.17.14
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 80
service IRC_DR
ip address 192.168.10.37
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 80
content ENOC_IRC
    add service IRC_1
    add service IRC_2
    add service IRC_DR
    vip address 192.168.200.58
    protocol tcp
    port 80
    advanced-balance sticky-srcip
    active
owner ENOC_GIT
content ENOC_IRC
    add service IRC_1
    add service IRC_2
    add service IRC_DR
    vip address 192.168.200.58
    protocol tcp
    port 80
    advanced-balance sticky-srcip
    active
group ENOC_IRC
add destination service IRC_1
add destination service IRC_2
add destination service IRC_DR
vip address 192.168.200.58
active
===================================================================================================
ENOCDC-CSS01(config)# show service summary
Service Name                     State     Conn Weight Avg   State
                                                         Load Transitions
IRC_1                            Alive         0      1     2            0
IRC_2                            Suspended     0      1   255            1
IRC_DR                           Suspended     0      1   255            1
ENOCDC-CSS01(config)# show summary
Global Bypass Counters:
   No Rule Bypass Count:     0
   Acl Bypass Count:         0
Owner            Content Rules    State     Services         Service Hits
ENOC_GIT
              ENOC_IRC         Active    IRC_1            103
                                            IRC_2            10
                                            IRC_DR           7
=======================================================================================================
Same setting I am doing for other servers and working fine only for these servers I am facing problem. Curently only one server is active in the configuration.
Kindly let me know what I am missing and how to fix the problem.
I have also attached the full configuration of CSS.

Hi,
My point of concern is that I did the same for Oracle server and this is working fine
http://192.168.200.95/forms/frmservlet?config=tp
only when I am doing the load balancing for
http://irs.enoc.com/irs.htm (This is not working).
By name and by IP address both are not working.
http://192.168.200.58/irs.htm (This is not working).
I dont have a option for TAC case is there a a way to fix the problem by apply other load balancing method. Is there something to do with the Circut VLAN. I didnt create the Circut VLAN 17 where this server is located.
I am doing almost 8 differenceservers load balancing in this CSS.
your expert opinion will definately help me.

CSS arrowpoint cookie load balancing issue

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for