Load Balancing on port

Hi To all
i have created one socket application which handles 150-180 request per second . Now i want to implement load balancing for that.It is session application.
does anybody know about this.
Thanks in advance
Regards,
Pandit

Yes, you can 'redirect' an inbound request from one machine to another. Beware though that using an IP redirect may not work for all machines - as some will block packets like that in order to avoid network attacks.
For the most part, it should work.
You could also create a load-balancing server yourself. This is a 3-host option, where you have a static machine that ALL client initially connect to. Then a server is selected to be the first to be used. After that the servers will report when a connection is opened, and closed on it to the load-balancer.
This is one of many different ways of working it.

Similar Messages

Nexus - port-channel load balancing

Port-channel load balancing is a global command or interface command in Nexus switch?
Thanks,
Manu

Hi,
It's a global command; port-channel load-balance ethernet.
You can find details in the Configuring Load Balancing Using Port Channels section of the Nexus 5500 Series NX-OS Interfaces Configuration Guide.
Regards

Load Balancing with BEFW11S4

I need to load balance incoming port 80 requests to multiple servers on my network. Is it possible with this router? Didn't see how to do it via the Port Range Forwarding screen.

i don't the feature you are looking for is there in the router ..

Problem with load balancing on CSS

Hi, we have a pair of servers that are load balanced for port 80 traffic to 198.x.x.21 using the h_www_tcp:80 content rule . I recently got a request that port 80 traffic directed to 198.x.x.21/apps/auction be directed only to one of the load balanced servers. I created a service and content rule r_auction_tcp:80, but traffic still seems to matching the load balancing content rule and going to the wrong server (the /app/auction site only exits on the first server).
I thought it might be sticyness so I experimented by assigning my pc IP addresses that have not be used and I would still end up on the wrong server with some of the addresses.
Any ideals?
content h_www_tcp:80
vip address 198.x.x.21
port 80
protocol tcp
advanced-balance sticky-srcip
add service webwa1.1_tcp:80
add service webwa2.1_tcp:80
redundant-index 1064
sticky-inact-timeout 480
active
service webwa1.1_tcp:80
ip address 10.6.3.30
protocol tcp
port 80
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 80
redundant-index 130
active
service webwa2.1_tcp:80
ip address 10.6.3.31
protocol tcp
port 80
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 80
redundant-index 140
active
content r_auction_tcp:80
vip address 198.x.x.21
redundant-index 1077
add service webwa1.1-auction_tcp:80
port 80
protocol tcp
url "/apps/auction/*"
active
service webwa1.1-auction_tcp:80
ip address 10.6.3.30
protocol tcp
port 80
keepalive type tcp
keepalive port 80
redundant-index 131
active

does that never work, or is it just some requests that sometimes fail to be remapped to the appropriate server?
It should normally work, but with the current config it is possible to see failures for session that stayed idle.
The solution is then to increase the flow-timeout-multiplier under each content rule to 50.
Gilles.

Load Balancer Host Information for Livecache Managed system

We are configuring the managed system for Livecache. Should we need to enter the Load balancer Host & port information on the managed system configuration?
I read through some forums & this is maintained for ABAP /Java stack & the information is pulled from SMICM.
Please advise.

Give your SCM system details
Refer http://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/695721

Can a load balancer perform PAT?

Can a load balancer perform Port Address Translation (PAT / NAT)?

Hi,
Yes, through Group Configuration Mode Command in CSS http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/data_center_app_services/css11500series/v7.40/command/reference/CmdGrpC.html
Dandy

Load balancing on an applicaton with multi-ports

One of our application open 5 ports and other 4 management ports. the ports can not be ranged.
to load balancing this, I did:
make seperate contents rules for every port. and all of them use aca.
Please advice me :
1. how can I group all the ports into one contents rule?
2. every rule for a port means the balancing in only by based on specialy port?
3. Can I balance the load between ports?
4. for administrator ports, what is the better balancing mothed?
Any comments will be apprecaited
Thanks in advance

Gilles,
What will be the best keepalive on the services to use in this case?
I have had a problem where I tried the same setup you have suggested above but what happen is i get a black hole if the service port(s) goes down on one of the servers.
At the beginning, I used the default ICMP keepalive and then tried the port xx keepalive but because the servers have multiple ports and if the port that is not monitored by keepalive goes down, the content rule still think that the service is still up and this is where I get i blackhole. To get around with the problem I have created multiple services, (one for each port) and configured the subsequent keepalive.
1. is there a better way of doing it? i,e script
2. is there any documentation on Cisco website on how to use the scripting tools on CSS?
Thanks again,
Ben

LOAD BALANCE (CSS) and Portal Port Number based on Instance Number

Hi,
My doubt is about LOAD BALANCE (CSS) and Portal Port Number based on Instance Number.
I have to install 3 servers machines and 2 servers databases cluster. There will be a HIGH AVAILABILITY environment. There will be a MIGRATION and UPGRADE.
Today there are 2 servers machines in Windows NLB. Today my production Portal is 6 6.20.
Once, I did something for LABORATORY TEST. Migration (6 6.40) and Upgrade (7.0)in two other machines. But they were with Windows NLB. When I did the installation, for each server machine and during the instalation I had to give one Instance Number for each and in result there was a different Port Number for each.
But I accessed both machines throught a virtual url(dns) with a specific port number. And it works!
NOW, with a HARDWARE LOAD BALANCE _ CSS I don't know how to do.
A guy who works with it tell us that couldn't redirect one Port Number for different port numbers. He couldn't configure the CSS like this.
My question is: Is he write? And if he is, there is a way to give the same instance number for my 3 new Portal servers machines? Example: 5(02)00.
Could you understand?
I need help.
Regards,
cheers,
Nivia

Nivia,
I have used F5 for load balancing, I am sure you can do the same with CSS. Yes, you can configure a virtual IP on the load balancer with standard ports (80 or 443) and load balancing the traffic to multiple servers with different ports. You can have different ports for each instance.
-Regards
RK

OSPF load balancing across multiple port channels

I have googled/searched for this everywhere but haven't been able to find a solution. Forgive me if I leave something out but I will try to convey all relevant information. Hopefully someone can provide some insight and many thanks in advance.
I have three switches (A, B, and C) that are all running OSPF and LACP port channelling among themselves on a production network. Each port channel interface contains two physical interfaces and trunks a single vlan (so a vlan connecting each switch over a port channel). OSPF is running on each vlan interface.
Switch A - ME3600
Switch B - 3550
Switch C - 3560G
This is just a small part of a much larger topology. This part forms a triangle, if you will, where A is the source and C is the destination. A and C connect directly via a port channel and are OSPF neighbors. A and B connect directly via a port channel and are OSPF neighbors. B and C connect directly via a port channel and are OSPF neighbors. Currently, all traffic from A to C traverses B. I would like to load balance traffic sourced from A with a destination of C on the direct link and on the links through B. If all traffic is passed through B, traffic is evenly split on the two interfaces on the port channel. If all traffic is pushed onto the direct A-C link, traffic is evenly balanced on the two interfaces on that port channel. If OSPF load balancing is configured on the two vlans from A (so A-C and A-B), the traffic is divided to each port channel but only one port on each port channel is utilized while the other one passes nothing. So half of each port channel remains unused. The port channel on B-C continues to load balance, evenly splitting the traffic received from half of the port channel from A.
A and C port channel load balancing is configured for src-dst-ip. B is a 3550 and does not have this option, so it is set to src-mac.
Relevant configuration:
Switch A:
interface Port-channel1
description Link to B
port-type nni
switchport trunk allowed vlan 11
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan11
ip address x.x.x.134 255.255.255.254
interface Port-channel3
description Link to C
port-type nni
switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan10
ip address x.x.x.152 255.255.255.254
Switch B:
interface Port-channel1
description Link to A
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 11
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan11
ip address x.x.x.135 255.255.255.254
interface Port-channel2
description Link to C
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 12
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan12
ip address x.x.x.186 255.255.255.254
Switch C:
interface Port-channel1
description Link to B
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 12
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan12
ip address x.x.x.187 255.255.255.254
interface Port-channel3
description Link to A
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan10
ip address x.x.x.153 255.255.255.254

This is more FYI. 10.82.4.0/24 is a subnet on switch C. The path to it is split across vlans 10 and 11 but once it hits the port channel interfaces only one side of each is chosen. I'd like to avoid creating more vlan interfaces but right now that appears to be the only way to load balance equally across the four interfaces out of switch A.
ME3600#sh ip route 10.82.4.0
Routing entry for 10.82.4.0/24
Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 154, type extern 1
Last update from x.x.x.153 on Vlan10, 01:20:46 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
x.x.x.153, from 10.82.15.1, 01:20:46 ago, via Vlan10
Route metric is 154, traffic share count is 1
* x.x.x.135, from 10.82.15.1, 01:20:46 ago, via Vlan11
Route metric is 154, traffic share count is 1
ME3600#sh ip cef 10.82.4.0
10.82.4.0/24
nexthop x.x.x.135 Vlan11
nexthop x.x.x.153 Vlan10
ME3600#sh ip cef 10.82.4.0 internal
10.82.4.0/24, epoch 0, RIB[I], refcount 5, per-destination sharing
sources: RIB
ifnums:
Vlan10(1157): x.x.x.153
Vlan11(1192): x.x.x.135
path 093DBC20, path list 0937412C, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4
nexthop x.x.x.135 Vlan11, adjacency IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
path 093DC204, path list 0937412C, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4
nexthop x.x.x.153 Vlan10, adjacency IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
output chain:
loadinfo 088225C0, per-session, 2 choices, flags 0003, 88 locks
flags: Per-session, for-rx-IPv4
16 hash buckets
< 0 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 1 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
< 2 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 3 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
< 4 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 5 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
< 6 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 7 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
< 8 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 9 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
<10 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
<11 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
<12 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
<13 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
<14 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
<15 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
Subblocks:
None

Problem Load Balancing connections for Grid Control Console on port 80!

I have two OMS and I'm balancing connections for Grid Control Console using a Software Load Balancer according with "Oracle Enterprise Manager Advanced Configuration". I have success where the load balancer is listening on port different to 80. When I configure Load Balancer to listen on port 80(architecture requirement) and distribute load between the two OMS(Port 7779), when login to Enterprise Manager Console the URL on the web browser changes to the port configured for HTTP server (port 7780) wich produces an "unable to connect" error message; and this behaviour also happends in some of the internal links of Grid Control Console too. Any ideas?
Thanks in advance!
Message was edited by:
user463224

I got it working, changing the "Port" directive to 80 on httpd.conf on HTTP Server

ACE: load balancing servers using DMZ ports on FWSM

devices; (2 core with the ff config)
6500
fwsm
idsm
msfc
SETUP;
Servers are connected to the dmzs on the core
REQUIREMENT;
to load balance the servers
QUESTION;
Using the ACE module, is it possibe to load balance the servers which are connected to the port which is configured as DMZ?
Thanks

does not matter where the servers are connected.
However, be aware that the flows from client to server needs to go through the loadbalancer BUT also the flows server to client.
So, you should be careful where you attach the ACE module.
The easier would be to attach to the DMZ as well between the FW and the servers.
Gilles.

Sticky load balancing across 2 ports with cookies

Hi,
I have a server configuration where I have 1 top level Apache server that deals with SSL termination (and handles static content) and proxy passes dynamic content onto 2 Tomcat servers on 2 ports, one for http requests (9001) and one for the requests that were secure, but have now been un-encrypted by Apache (9002). My 2 Tomcat servers are load balanced using a CSS and I need this load balancing to stick to the tomcat servers regardless of port so that the user is stuck to the same Tomcat server for their entire session.
I would like to use arrowpoint cookies to perform this stickyness, but the documentation suggests that arrowpoint cookie load balancing (in fact any cookie based load balancing) requires the port to be specified in the content rule. Is this correct? Is my only option to use the source IP for stickyness? I don't understand why the port should be required if the stickyness is via a cookie. Can I not simply configure my 2 tomcat servers as services with no port and add a single content rule that load balances these services using arrowpoint-cookie advanced balancing?
service tomcat1
ip address x.x.x.x
active
service tomcat2
ip address x.x.x.x
active
owner me
   content sticky
     vip address x.x.x.x
     protocol tcp
     url "/*"
     add service tomcat-1
     add service tomcat-2
     advanced-balance arrowpoint-cookie
     active

Angela-
The issue with port is that cookies are very specifically HTTP only and the CSS has no way of knowing what protocol will hit a VIP prior to trying to address it as HTTP. Your issue is actually a bit clearer than it is initially led to be - you can still use 2 different rules by using the configuration below.
However, you might be headed for a headache if you don't implicitly control the client's actions. By default, browsers don't generally send cookies cross-protocol and definitely not cross-domain. Use something like httpwatch or iewatch to check out the headers your client sends to your site. Make sure when the 200ok arrives with the set-cookie that the client sends that cookie in all preceeding packets that are HTTP and HTTPS both.
service tomcat1
string "tomcat1"
ip address x.x.x.x
active
service tomcat2
string "tomcat2"
ip address x.x.x.x
active
owner me
   content sticky9001
     vip address x.x.x.x
     protocol tcp
     url "/*"
     port 9001
     add service tomcat-1
     add service tomcat-2
     advanced-balance arrowpoint-cookie
     active
   content sticky9002
     vip address x.x.x.x
     protocol tcp
     url "/*"
     port 9002
     add service tomcat-1
     add service tomcat-2
     advanced-balance arrowpoint-cookie
     active
With this configuration, the CSS will use the "string" as the cookie value. So if the client were to recieve set-cookie: ArrowpointCookie=tomcat1, it should use it for either rule, and end up on tomcat1 accessing either VIP.
Regards,
Chris

Load-balancing Algorithm for NX-OS Port Channels

Hi, all
I do not understand description of port-channel load-balance ethernet command.
switch(config)# port-channel load-balance ethernet ?
destination-ip         Destination IP address
destination-mac        Destination MAC address
destination-port       Destination TCP/UDP port
source-dest-ip         Source & Destination IP address (includes l2)
source-dest-ip-only    Source & Destination IP addresses only
source-dest-mac        Source & Destination MAC address
source-dest-port       Source & Destination TCP/UDP port (includes l2 and l3)
source-dest-port-only Source & Destination TCP/UDP port only
source-ip              Source IP address
source-mac             Source MAC address
source-port            Source TCP/UDP port
Please tell me what the following descriptions mean.
Source & Destination IP address (includes l2)
Source & Destination TCP/UDP port (includes l2 and l3)
What are the meaning of "includes l2" and "includes l2 and l3" ?
Thank you for your cooperation in advance.

Hi Satoru,
On the Nexus 5000/6000 platforms, all FEXs will inherit the global hashing algorithm from the parent device.
On the Nexus 7000 platform, hashing algorithms can be assigned on a per FEX basis (all load balancing changes must be made from the Admin VDC):
N7K-A(config)# port-channel load-balance src-dst ip-l4port fex 134
Any FEX without a hashing algorithm configured with inherit the global hash. Making changes to the modular/global hash will not alter FEX specific hashing algorithms.
To verify the configuration applied you can use this command:
N5K_A# show port-channel load-balance
On the Nexus 7000, the per FEX algorithm can be checked by appending the ‘fex <#>’ to the end of the command in the Admin VDC or the FEX’s respective VDC:
N7K-A(config)# show port-channel load-balance fex 134
Regards,
Richard

How can ftp service on non-standard port be load balanced using Cisco ACE.

How can ftp service on non-standard port be load balanced using Cisco ACE.For example ftp service required on tcp 2000 port

Hi Samarjit,
you can do this by specifying the port number in the class map that you create . Please find the below mentioend config guide where you can specify the tcp/udp port , range or ports or even the wild card to match the port.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/services_modules/ace/v3.00_A1/configuration/administration/guide/mapolcy.html#wp1318826
Regards
Abijith

Port Channel Load-Balancing Algorithm (North Bound)

I'm trying to figure out what the load balancing algorithm for the 6100 and 6200 FIs for the Northbound connections. I can't find any documentation on how to change it.
The Nexus 7000s use an 8-bit hash, making it very easy to do something other than 2, 4, or 8 link port channel and get even (at least algorithmically) distribution.
Catalyst switches (not sure about Sup2T though) would use a 1, 2, or 3-bit index, which would skew traffic algorthmically if you used a non-power of 2.
Looking at the 5K documentation, it seems to use the Catalyst style (though haven't been able to confirm). My guess is that whatever is used for the 5Ks is used for the 6100/6200.
Design wise, this would mean you would want to use powers of 2 for your NB uplinks.

Hello Tony,
On UCS FI, it uses " sr-cdest-ip " as the load balancing algorithm and uses 8 parameters for hashing
6248-01-B(nxos)# sh port-channel load-balance
Port Channel Load-Balancing Configuration:
System: source-dest-ip
Port Channel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
Non-IP: source-dest-mac
IP: source-dest-ip source-dest-mac
6248-01-B(nxos)# show platform fwm info pc port-channel 1
dump pc info: if_index 369098752 dump_all 0 verbose 1
Po1: state 0x0 #pifs 1 fwimpd ctx 0x9666c1c
Po1: hash params - l2_da 1 l2_sa 1 l3_da 1 l3_sa 1
Po1: hash params - l4_da 1 l4_sa 1 xor_sa_da 1 hash_elect 1
I could not find an option to change these values.
Padma

Load Balancing on port

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for