CSS: BoxToBox and Global Server Load Balancing

Hi,
I'm going to setup a CSS based Global Load Balancing architecture in two different sites with 2xCSS11503 in each site.
I need DNS Sticky but I'm not going to configure a Global Sticky Database since I would like to configure the two CSS in each site in Box To Box redunancy.
Is it possible to configure on a CSS two app session, one for the Zone-based DNS with remote site and the other one for local Box-to-Box redund?
Thank you
Kind Regards
Fulvio

Hi Fulvio,
Take a look at the NOTE on the below link
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/data_center_app_services/css11500series/v8.20_v8.10/configuration/gslb/guide/DNS.html#wp1170057
Box to box should be at part of the caveat
Thanks
Venky

Similar Messages

ACE 4710- Global Site load-balancing

Does the 4710 have a feature like global site load balancing like the CSS?
We have a site that will have 2 ISPs but we don't have our own block of IP addresses to advertise so we would need to use the ISPs IP blocks. We've had issues in the past advertising one ISPs IP block out another ISP so I was wondering if there was a way we could configure the ACE similar to the way the CSS did global site load balancing. Basically have the ACE act as a DNS server and respond back with the IP address of whichever ISP we wanted the end user to come in on and use a probe to ping the ISPs remote WAN IP to verify the circuit is passing traffic and resolve the correct IP if it's not.
Thanks

ACE does not have DNS server functionality.
And these methods are not supported on the CSS anymore.
The solution we offer is to install a Cisco GSS (Global Site Selector) which can interact with the ACE or CSS or CSM to determine which vip is up or down.
Gilles.

Using ACE for proxy server load balancing

Hello groups,
I wanted to know your experiences of using ACE for proxy server load balancing.
I want to load balance to a pool of proxy servers. Note: load-balancing should be based on the HTTP URL (i can't use source or dest. ip address) so that
a certain domain always gets "cached/forwarded" to the same proxy server. I don't really want to put matching
criteria in the configuration (such as /a* to S1, /b* to S2, /c* to S3,etc..), but have this hash calculated automatically.
Can the ACE compute its own hash based on the number of "online" proxy servers ? ie. when 4 servers are online, distribute domains between 1,2,3,4 evenly.
Should server 4 fail, recalculate hash so that the load of S4 gets distributed across the other 3 evenly. Also load-balancing domains of S1 ,S2 and S3 should not change if S4 fails.....
regards,
Geert

This is done with the following predictor command:
Scimitar1/Admin# conf t
Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z.
Scimitar1/Admin(config)# serverfarm Proxy
Scimitar1/Admin(config-sfarm-host)# predictor hash ?
address         Configure 'hash address' Predictor algorithms
content         Configure 'hash http content' Predictor algorithms
cookie          Configure 'hash cookie' Predictor algorithms
header          Configure 'hash header' Predictor algorithm
layer4-payload Configure 'hash layer4-payload' Predictor algorithms
url             Configure 'hash url' Predictor algorithm
Scimitar1/Admin(config-sfarm-host)# predictor hash url
It does hash the url and the result takes into account the number of active proxies dynamically.
This command has been designed for this kind of scenario that you describe.
Gilles.

App.server load balancing for SAP System with 1 PS

Hi,
In SAP CPS 7.0 (Build M26.12) I have a SAP system with Central Instance + 10 App.servers, but all instances are managed by 1 ProcessServer.
After activating the "App.server load balancing" setting in SAP system definition the application servers are becoming visible in CPS with their load factors (number of BGD wp's on app.servers) and load numbers (number of active jobs on app.servers).
This is so far fine, but the additional functionality is not working as I would expect, I have issues with 2 functionalities:
1. Based on documentation after activating also the XAL connection the CPS should submit the job on app.server with best performance based on XAL monitoring data filling the TARGET_SERVER parameter.
This functionality is not working for me at all
2. A useful functionality after activating the "App.server load balancing" setting is that the ProcessServer is going to "Overloaded" status when all BGD wp's of SAP system are occupied, thus restricting submitting new jobs during overload situation. But I had an issue also with this functionality, after SAP system recovery from overload situation, the CPS still remained in Overload status (so no new jobs were submitted).
As a workaround I had increased the treshold values for loads on all app.servers for this SAP system, what was fine for several days, but after a while I believe this was a reason of unexpected performance issues in CPS, therefore I have deactivated the 'App.server load balancing" setting at all for this ProcessServer.
I would appreciate your feedbacks with this functionality.
Thanks and Regards,
Ernest Liczki

Hi Preetish,
This connect string option is to loadbalance RFC connections. These are balanced upon login, once you are connected to a particular application server (AS) you stay on that server until you reconnect.
Since CPS uses multiple RFC connections, this will result in the connections being distributed over the available AS resources which is fine as long as they are generally evenly loaded. If you have certain AS hosts that are continuosly more loaded than the rest, then you probably don't want the CPS RFC connections to end up on these servers.
The original question is about loadbalancing of batch jobs over the available AS resources, and this is done independent of the RFC connection load balancing. Even if all CPS RFC connections are pinned to the DB/CI host, you can still loadbalance jobs over the available SAP AS hosts, either by using SAPs builtin balancing, or the CPS algorithm by activating the checkbox as indicated in the first entry in this thread.
Finally, to reply to Ernest's question: I believe there are some fixes on the app load balancing in the latest release, M26.17 should be available on the SWDC now.
Regards,
Anton.
Edited by: Anton Goselink on May 29, 2009 9:06 PM

Dev6 Server Load Balancing

Hi
I try to install Load Balancing with Dev6/Patch2 and OAS4.0.7.1
on 4 Machines with WinNT Server 4 SP 5. I tried to do it as
described in the documentation. But I did not succeed. It seems
to be that the Doc is not complete or wrong. Could somebody give
an example how to set up the LB Servers and Clients as NT
Services ?
Thank's in advance
Charly
null

Hi Steven,
No LACP and SLB are different.
LACP is the Link Aggregation Control Protocol, which is the protocol used within the IEEE 802.3ad (now 802.1AX) Link Aggregation mechanism to control the bundling and unbundling of the physical links into an aggregate link.
Server Load Balancing is a feature in IOS to load balance traffic destined to a virtual IP across a group of real IP. From Configuring Server Load Balancing:
The SLB feature is a Cisco IOS-based solution that provides IP server load balancing. Using the IOS SLB feature, the network administrator defines a virtual server that represents a group of real servers in a cluster of network servers known as a server farm.
Server Load Balancing is effectively what the Cisco Application Control Engine (ACE) etc., does but in IOS.
Regards

Server Load balancing issues

the servers are loadbalancing between the switches '3'
and '2' and the link between the two switches is blocked.
This link was forwarding before and thus any traffic going to the server was
send to the Servers correctly no matter on which switch they are active.
However after addition of another link in between the switches 'root'
and '1', the path cost to the root has decreased and thus the link
between the '2' and '3' is Blocking and the other link between
the '2' and '1' is Forwarding as it should be ideally. But
this would be creating an issue because the trafic coming from outside i.e.
through switch '1' to the server will be correctly send to the
server if the server NIC is active on the '3' because the Virtual MAC
addresses are binded accordinlgy. In case the server falls onto the other
NIC which is on the '2' the traffic won't be able to pass because the
MAC address is not binded on the trunk connecting the switches '1'
and '2'. This binding cannot be done because the same MAC address is
being learned on the another trunk on the '1' which is connecting
to 'root'. So if we bind the same Virtual MAC on two trunks on the same
switch ('1') then this will cause MAC Address Flapping on the
switch and hence canot be done.
In another case,we can able to bind virtuak MAC on two trunks on the same
switch('1') and it's working fine.
The servers are load balancing in round robin fashion. each server has 2 NICs and work in Active-Passive mode. The servers load balance each other when all their active links are connected to '3' switch but when two of the active NICs of two servers are connected to '3' and the rest of the two active NICs from the other two servers are connected to '2' switch then only the forst 2 servers load balance and the other 2 servers do not load balance.
Please help.
Thanks in advance.

In my experience, server load balancing is one of the most difficult things to get going properly in a switched LAN environment. Switched LANs are designed so that one MAC address can only be bound to one switch port. Therefore, if you have two NICs with the same MAC address (real or virtual), then you will get flapping somewhere.
I have seen various ways that the manufacturers try to get around this limitation of switched LANs. For example, one technique I have seen, practiced by ISA Server, is to use a multicast MAC address for the service so that frames go to both exit ports. But that does not always work well unless you tweak the network to acommodate it.
What sort of servers are they, and what system is used for the load balancing?
Kevin Dorrell
Luxembourg

WLC Radius Server Load Balance

Hi,
Can someone provide me detailed description on how WLC Radius Server Load balance works.
Becuase, I encounted a problem of User Authenticated with the 1st Radius Server, but Accounting Records are actually on 2nd Server .
Any response will be very appreciated
-Angela

Hi Angela,
I pasted below the part of config guide explaining the different modes. In summary :
-Fallback off means : when 1st radius server shows dead , WLC moves to the second. And will only change again when the 2nd is dead too.
-Passive means : whent 1st radius is dead, WLC moves to the second. If there is a new authentication coming in, it will try the 1st radius server again
-Active means : WLC constantly sends radius probes to detect when primary is back up.
config radius fallback-test mode {off | passive | active}
where
•off disables RADIUS server fallback.
•passive causes the controller to revert to a server with a lower priority from the available backup servers without using extraneous probe messages. The controller simply ignores all inactive servers for a time period and retries later when a RADIUS message needs to be sent.
•active causes the controller to revert to a server with a lower priority from the available backup servers by using RADIUS probe messages to proactively determine whether a server that has been marked inactive is back online. The controller simply ignores all inactive servers for all active RADIUS requests. Once the primary server receives a response from the recovered ACS server, the active fallback RADIUS server no longer sends probe messages to the server requesting the active probe authentication.

CSM(content switching module) supports the 2 tier server load balance ?

hi everyone,
Does any know the CSM support 2 tier server load balance ?
this means that CSM perform the server load balance for servers and the same servers require another time Server load balance. In the other word,
the CSM supports server port and client port for server load balance ?
thanks
fred.

Hi, this seems to describe a typical case of multi-tier design where the CSM needs to handle 2 types of connections:
1. clients->CSM->serverfarm1
2. serverfarm1->CSM->serverfarm2
We usually refer to the second type of connections as server-to-server load balanced traffic.
There is no problem in handling that scenario with the CSM and you have a few options.
In particular, each virtual server on the CSM can be configured to only accept incoming connections from a specific VLAN, so you can use that as an additional security measure or to distinguish connections based on which VLAN they come in from.
If you want to, you could even configure the CSM with 2 virtual servers with the same exact virtual IP and L4 port, but listening on 2 separate VLANs (the client-side VLAN and serverfarm1 VLAN) and use a different server farm based on that.
One important thing to keep in mind when handling server-to-server load balanced connections: if serverfarm1 and serverfarm2 are on the same VLAN, you have to configure "client NAT" for the server-to-server connections, to force the return traffic back to the CSM.

How does CEF perform equal and unequal cost load balancing?

hello
How does CEF perform equal and unequal cost load balancing?
thanks

Hello Wang,
it is only EIGRP that can perform load balancing over unequal cost links.
For equal cost links CEF allocates 16 buckets and maps them to the the physical links.
the result of a binary operation is used to associated a packet to an outgoing interface:
Source IP address EXOR DEstination IP Address EXOR hash
the hash is a seed that changes only at every reload.
Actually the last 4 bits are used so that each flow can be classified in one bucket.
then the outgoing interface is the one asscociated to the result of the exor operation.
Another way to see is that m bits are used so that 2^m is equal to N number of links (if N is even)
the rule is simple and pre-established
Hope to help
Giuseppe

Please provide vShield Manager Server Load Balance values

Hi All:
     I couldn't find values about the server load balance of vShield Manager.
Please provide these value:
1. Throughput      Mbps
2. Web port 80 server load balance connections:
3. SSL port 443 server load balance connections:
Thanks
BR.
                        Vincent

Hi Vincent,
Can you please eloborate your question ?

7.10 installation server, load balancing and multiple installation servers

Hi
In the 7.10 GUI installation server, there is no Load balancing option anamore, also there seems to be no option to easily clone the installation server from within the nwsapsetupadmin.exe program.
If having MANY users at one location, and needing more than one installation server to accomodate the frontend installations, do you need to do this "manually" now ? grouping users and and the logon script directing different user groups to different sapgui installation servers ?
what about creating multiple installation servers easily, is it possible to simply copy the installation server directory (c:\sapinst f.ex.) to another file server, share the directory and configure the DS and IS services (if needed) ??
will configured packages and "on end install" scripts and such be copied too to the new installation server ?
I need to easily create installation servers in 15 countries, this is the reason for my question...

Hi Kim Sonny,
hope you're doing fine
Regarding your question:
The "Load Balancing" was more a fail-over service and wasn't intended to use for several locations like in your case.
So the easiest way to do this is to setup one installation server and copy the files to the other servers. On the new Installation servers you only have to setup the service again and that's it.
Cheers,
Martin

Server Load-balancing and ACL router decision

Hello,
My 2 server farm distribution switches are running in "hybrid" mode, with CAT OS on the switch and IOS on the MSFC.
My server team is asking to block traffic to a specific server that is load balanced using Cisco's CSM load-balancer which is also installed in the chassis.
The question that I have is this.
Does anyone know in what order the MSFC will inspect and apply the ACL and when will the CSM make the load balancing decision?
The reason I need to know this is that the CSM is setup in bridged mode, where traffic to the server comes into the MSFC with a destination IP of a VIP which resides on the CSM. Subsequently, the CSM forwards the traffic to the one of the real servers in the load-balanced server farm after it makes its load-balancing decision. Which ocurrs first??
Does anyone have any info on what ocurrs first and so forth??
Is there a link to Cisco's website that explains this process??
Thanks in advance for your help.
Tony

Tony,
It sounds as if your setup is like this:
Client VLAN----MSFC----VLAN A----CSM----Server VLAN
With VLAN A and Server VLAN being the same IP subnet.
In this case all client traffic reaching the VIPs on the CSM first traverses the MSFC. So, if you want to block traffic to a specific VIP or Server IP you can do that on the MSFC's Interface for Client VLAN. You could configure an access list that filters inbound traffic on that VLAN interface.
Make sense?
-Brad

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

Questions on replication and h/w load balancer

          Why does h/w load balancer have to support passive cookies and inspect them to
          dispatch the request to the primary server first? If we have in-memory replication
          and if h/w loadbalancer just dispatches the http request from the client to any
          of the weblogic servers in the cluster wouldnt this work?
          Is it to pin the session to the creator server to minimize the chance of replication
          misses due to n/w issues, member server slow speed, buffer overwrite etc.
          -Shiraz


Yes, and previous to 6.1 (?) if the request showed up at the wrong server it
          would fail.
          Peace,
          Cameron Purdy
          Tangosol Inc.
          Tangosol Coherence: Clustered Coherent Cache for J2EE
          Information at http://www.tangosol.com/
          "Shiraz Zaidi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
          news:3c15aa10$[email protected]..
          >
          > Why does h/w load balancer have to support passive cookies and inspect
          them to
          > dispatch the request to the primary server first? If we have in-memory
          replication
          > and if h/w loadbalancer just dispatches the http request from the client
          to any
          > of the weblogic servers in the cluster wouldnt this work?
          >
          > Is it to pin the session to the creator server to minimize the chance of
          replication
          > misses due to n/w issues, member server slow speed, buffer overwrite etc.
          >
          > -Shiraz

Server load balancing for application access using multiple servers

1.what are the methods supported by cisco switches for load balancing
2. I want to achive users to access 1 particular ip from different locations but phsically few servers which handle the application and data

well some servers allow you to install routing protocols on them. you could OSPF some links together.
or you could NLB if it is a microsoft server. this uses a heartbeat network, a virtual mac and an IP address bound to the vmac.
you could use NIC teaming. broadcom nics on dell servers allow you to configure them for loadbalancing, failover and a few other options.
or if the servers are mirrored using MSCS or something similar (i.e configured the same but independant) you could just load balance using DNS.
hope this helps. jsut some ideas quickly off the top of my head

CSS: BoxToBox and Global Server Load Balancing

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for