Local Director & cat6500/Sup2 with ASLB or MNLP, when ?

Does somebody to know when ASLB or MNLP for Local Director will be accesible on platform cat6500 with Sup2/PFC2/MSFC2
As I know there is no support for them on such cat6500 yet.
Actually I'm using:
LocalDirector 430 with soft version 4.2.4
WS-X6K-SUP2-2GE/WS-F6K-PFC2 with CatOS 7.4(2)
WS-F6K-MSFC2 with IOS 12.1(13)E2
and can't configure nor "redirection assist" on LD nor "casa" on router
Regards
Maciej Kolodziej

Unfortunately that document was posted: Fri May 18 10:24:16 PDT 2001
later Cisco has produced document:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a0080121d6a.html#wp1025726
where we can find:
Note The information and procedures in this chapter apply only to the Supervisor Engine 1 with Layer 3 switching engine (Policy Feature Card or PFC). ASLB is not supported on Supervisor Engine 2 with Layer 3 Switching Engine II (PFC2).
Thus my question in subject ;-))
regards
Maciej Ko³odziej

Similar Messages

Local Director http probes with URLs and http redirect mode

I am trying to configure http probes on my Local director 430 running 4.2.3
I am using http redirect mode so the Virtual is bound to URLs not REALs with are linked to DIPs which are bound to REALs. So far the probes seem to not actually do anything. Does anyone know if the probes are compatible with URL redirect loadbalancing. And if so how one would go about configuring it.
Thanks for your help.

keepalive can be used for the probe notification in this case.
Check the following url for details.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/webscale/css/bsccfggd/services.htm#xtocid727448

Local director with multiple virtual servers

I have a local director with 4 interfaces. Two interfaces are used for 2 virtual servers each bound to 2 real servers. The virtuals and the reals are on the same sub-net as the local director's IP address.
I would like to know if I can use the other 2 interfaces to bind 2 real addresses to a third virtual where all three of the address are located on a different Subnet from the servers already present.

Yes this is possible. However, in order to make this work you will need to configure a couple
of things. First, on the Local Director you should configure an 'alias ip address' that belongs in this new subnet. Second, you need to configure a secondary IP address on the upstream router. This will serve several purposes. One, the servers will be able to reach devices outside their own subnet. Two, the router will now belong to this subnet and therefore will be able to ARP for the new virtual.
Hope it helps.
Best regards,
Chip Schneider
Cisco TAC

Does the Cisco Cache Engine Work with the Cisco Local Director ?

I need to know if it is possible and how to use cisco local director to redirect traffic to the cache engine in reverse proxy configuration and transparent proxy configuration.

In directed mode, the client browsers are configured to point to a proxy to a virtual IP address on the Local Director. I know the Local Director does not support a real server that does not have a virtual address defined so it can't transparently forward like the CSS.

Server load balancing on Local Director implementing HTTP redirection

Hi, got an interesting problem when implementing the HTTP redirection method of session persistance or stickiness when balancing a couple of web servers on a Local Director 416. The session persistance works fine but it looks like one of the two servers is getting all the traffic rather than balancing accross the two. The servers are equally spec'd and when it comes to the predictor setting for the virtual, I'm just using the defaults i.e. leastconns/roundrobin. Is there a better predictor setting to use?? Any input would be appreciated.
Rgds
Adam Lacoba

The loaded argument has worked well. Take note that this requires a value to be set with the weight command. It gives a specific amount of traffic to one, and then moves to the other.

Local Director Load Balancing question

Using IOS 3.2.2
I have a local director 416 with 2 real servers. I would like to send all traffic to 1 server and if it fails to switch over to the secondary server. The way I see to do it is to use weighted load balancing and set the weight of the 2nd server to zero. But if the primary server fails what will happen since the secondary server has a weight of zero.
Jason

Not being a Cisco employee, I guess I can't define what "proper" is, but with the backup command, you don't need to play with the weights at all.
You just bind the primary real server to the virtual, then assign a backup to the primary. The backup server does not get directly bound to the virtual, so the only way it's going to get any traffic is if the primary server is down.

SNMP problem in Local Director 416 V4.2.3

I am unable to get SNMP response from local director :
herafter the snmp configuration .
snmp-server host 62.184.xx.yy
snmp-server enable traps
snmp-server community xxxxxxxxx
snmp-server contact Philippe
snmp-server location B2
What else should be in configuration to have the local director respond to
SNMP request from snmp-server host 62.184.xx.yy ?
Thanks for your help.

This is not expected behavior with the LD.
I did see one bug (CSCdw87752) regarding the LD duplicating multicast packets in 4.2.3. The scenario was slightly different. In the bug, the LD was duplicating multicast packets from a Checkpoint Firewall. That bug is fixed in version 4.2.4. I think it is likely that this fix will also fix your issue.
Let me know if that works or not...
-Steve

Local Director & HTTP Redirection

Hi, just wondering if anyone has successfully implemented HTTP
redirection on Cisco Local Director 416 running ver 4.1.2 Basically I'm
after any pitfalls to look out for. Current implementation utilizes
generic session stickiness however this has problems for clients
trying to access our load balanced servers if they come from behind
multiple proxies via their ISP.
Servers are Private IP addressed (Firewall in front of LD performing NAT static
txlation)
On another point, how does the Cisco CS11000 (Arrowpoint) perform
session persistance/stickiness or what "better" ways does the
Arrowpoint acheive this as compared to Local Director?
Any helpful input would be much appreciated.
Rgds
Adam

Since there has been no response to your post, it appears to be either too complex or too rare an issue for other forum members to assist you. If you don't get a suitable response to your post, you may wish to review our resources at the online Technical Assistance Center (http://www.cisco.com/tac) or speak with a TAC engineer. You can open a TAC case online at http://www.cisco.com/tac/caseopen
If anyone else in the forum has some advice, please reply to this thread.
Thank you for posting.

Using the Local Director "alias ip address" command

I believe it is possible to have real servers in a different subnet to the local director virtual address by using the "alias ip address" command. This eliminates the need to use a router between the Local Director and the real servers. Does this mean that the Local Director is routing between subnets? Do the real servers use the Local Director alias address as their default gateway? Can someone provide an example config using the "alias ip address" command?

no, the local director will not route. there are two ways to make this work.
1
the router on the front side of the local director must be configured with a secondary ip address from the real server subnet plus add the alias command
or
2
use the alias command, plus each real server must be configured with a static ARP entry. the ARP entry is for the ip address of the servers configured default gateway and the MAC address of the router interface.

Weblogic's redirect and Local Director session stikiness.

Hi all,
We've been facing a very painfull problem in my company. Basically, it relates
to the fact that weblogic 'uselessly' makes a redirect to index.jsp everytime
somebody tries to reach our website.
The redirect itselve is bad, but when we have Local Director configured in front
of our farm, with stickness enabled, the damn think locks for 3+ seconds before
sending the also weird '0000' characters (that I suppose, indicate the page or
transaction was completed). This 0000 comes from Weblogic itself (we notice it
sends that even when we are not behind local director). We are also expiriencing
some premature session timeoffs... very weird.
Did anybody even configured WL 6.1 SP2 as the main webserver under a local director,
and faced the same problem? We are desperate here.
Thanks,
Rodrigo

One other thing ... using URL with openConnection we found that we had to
end-pad the stream with two additional bytes (ignored) to get the full
message committed. Could be the same freaky thing.
Peace,
Cameron Purdy
Tangosol, Inc.
Clustering Weblogic? You're either using Coherence, or you should be!
Download a Tangosol Coherence eval today at http://www.tangosol.com/
"Rodrigo Rosa" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3c5f0dcb$[email protected]..
>
Hi all,
We've been facing a very painfull problem in my company. Basically, itrelates
to the fact that weblogic 'uselessly' makes a redirect to index.jspeverytime
somebody tries to reach our website.
The redirect itselve is bad, but when we have Local Director configured infront
of our farm, with stickness enabled, the damn think locks for 3+ secondsbefore
sending the also weird '0000' characters (that I suppose, indicate thepage or
transaction was completed). This 0000 comes from Weblogic itself (wenotice it
sends that even when we are not behind local director). We are alsoexpiriencing
some premature session timeoffs... very weird.
Did anybody even configured WL 6.1 SP2 as the main webserver under a localdirector,
and faced the same problem? We are desperate here.
Thanks,
Rodrigo

Redirect, Weblogic and Local Director... unfortunate combination.

Hi all,
We've been facing a very painfull problem in my company. Basically, it relates
to the fact that weblogic 'uselessly' makes a redirect to index.jsp everytime
somebody tries to reach our website.
The redirect itselve is bad, but when we have Local Director configured in front
of our farm, with stickness enabled, the damn think locks for 3+ seconds before
sending the also weird '0000' characters (that I suppose, indicate the page or
transaction was completed). This 0000 comes from Weblogic itself (we notice it
sends that even when we are not behind local director). We are also expiriencing
some premature session timeoffs... very weird.
Did anybody even configured WL 6.1 SP2 as the main webserver under a local director,
and faced the same problem? We are desperate here.
Thanks,
Rodrigo

One other thing ... using URL with openConnection we found that we had to
end-pad the stream with two additional bytes (ignored) to get the full
message committed. Could be the same freaky thing.
Peace,
Cameron Purdy
Tangosol, Inc.
Clustering Weblogic? You're either using Coherence, or you should be!
Download a Tangosol Coherence eval today at http://www.tangosol.com/
"Rodrigo Rosa" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3c5f0dcb$[email protected]..
>
Hi all,
We've been facing a very painfull problem in my company. Basically, itrelates
to the fact that weblogic 'uselessly' makes a redirect to index.jspeverytime
somebody tries to reach our website.
The redirect itselve is bad, but when we have Local Director configured infront
of our farm, with stickness enabled, the damn think locks for 3+ secondsbefore
sending the also weird '0000' characters (that I suppose, indicate thepage or
transaction was completed). This 0000 comes from Weblogic itself (wenotice it
sends that even when we are not behind local director). We are alsoexpiriencing
some premature session timeoffs... very weird.
Did anybody even configured WL 6.1 SP2 as the main webserver under a localdirector,
and faced the same problem? We are desperate here.
Thanks,
Rodrigo

Local Director 416 Seamless Real Changes

Say I have a Virtual:443 with two reals web01:6443 and web02:6443. Now I want to add in reals web03:6443 and web046443 and remove web01:6443 and web02:6443. But I don't want to disrupt any conversations that may already be in progress to one of those servers. How do I migrate to the new without disturbing the connections on the old but not allow any new connections to be made to the old? Thanks.

There is a well known problem of keeping a session bound to one physical real server after the session is setup on HTTP (open) transport and later moved to HTTPS (secure) transport protocol. In this case, the HTTP redirection should be setup at the application level. The server can send a redirect (either a 302 or an HREF embedded in the actual web page itself) to HTTP, so no load balancing takes place at the Local Director. Another possible solution would be to switch to HTTPS sooner, and perform the session opening encrypted. This is preferred also for encrypting the login username and password. If you keep the whole session running via HTTPS, the generic sticky can ensure that the same server will be used for a client. The second solution and configuration is described in this document. The HTTP traffic is limited to first contact with the site (the client can type simple site name to address bar). When reaching Local Director, the browser receives a 302 redirect message with the URL configured, including the HTTPS tag, so there is the complete name of the server to reach. The session (on application level) is built from the beginning with the secure server (the real servers do not handle HTTP at all). Tthe session continues with the unique server name, so it is always reaching the same.
http://cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/contnetw/ps1894/products_configuration_example09186a00801a7299.shtml#maintask1

Local Director Questions

Our web folks are testing an application that currently does not support server clustering. They want to have all web traffic be directed to one server(server1) and have a second (server2) identical server as a backup.
I was wondering if can bind the real server (server1) to the virtual server and have the second real server (server2) backup the first real server using the backup command? Is there any potential pitfalls that I may need to take into account by doing it this way?
Also they wanted to know if the Local Director would work in the previous scenario if the two servers are physically connected to the same switch but reside in different VLANs?
Any input would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks

This is exactly how you would configure it. There is only one potential pitfall that I can think of in your particular scenario. If server1 fails, server2 starts getting the connections. As soon as server1 comes back into service all the new connections will be sent to server1. This is a good thing in most situations but you need to see if the application can deal with this.
Regarding location of the backup box. When you say the two servers are connected to the same switch but reside in different VLANs do you also mean that the servers are in different subnets? If so, this is a little more complex depending on the topology but can easily be worked out. If the servers are simply located in separate VLANs on the switch but are in the same subnet then this configuration should work without issue.

Local Director rebooting

I'm having a problem with my LD rebooting on me. It seems that when I bring certain (virtual and real) server into service, my Local Director reboots. Has anyone seen this behaviour before?
Thanks,
Dave

Try updating your LD code to a newer release. I think I remember a bug on older code.

Local Director 416 and IP Multicast

We are experiencing issues where a Local Director 416, running 4.2.3 code is duplicating a multicast stream received on it's private interface out it's public interface.
The LD interfaces are not secured as there is bridged traffic flowing through it.
Sniffs of the ports on the LD show a single order of packets going in, and an identical packet for every original received packet (two packets out for every one in). The duplicate packets have identical timestamps, IDs, etc.
Anyone ever see this and know of a solution?
Thanks!

This is not expected behavior with the LD.
I did see one bug (CSCdw87752) regarding the LD duplicating multicast packets in 4.2.3. The scenario was slightly different. In the bug, the LD was duplicating multicast packets from a Checkpoint Firewall. That bug is fixed in version 4.2.4. I think it is likely that this fix will also fix your issue.
Let me know if that works or not...
-Steve

Local Director & cat6500/Sup2 with ASLB or MNLP, when ?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for