[c-nsp] Load balancing

[Brant I. Stevens]

I haven't looked at Cisco's load-balancers since the 11154, but had nothing
but the worst experience with them.  I would say to make sure you include
the F5 Big-IP and the Netscaler boxes in your evaluation.  Also ping the
loadbalancing mailing list at lb-l at vegan.net.




On 12/01/2004 05:07 PM, "Ed Whitesell" <edwlist at airpathwireless.com> wrote:

> 
> For web traffic, 115001s are much better than when I had used SLB on
> 6500s and 7200s a couple of years ago.  For UDP services, it's a little
> tricky to setup, but it does work well once it is configured.  UDP
> traffic is probably easier to setup and manage using SLB, but in the
> end, it makes more sense to have all of the load balancing done on the
> same hardware, IMHO.
> 
> Or, if you have a 6500 or two, I've also heard that the Content
> Switching Module for them is pretty good.
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Ed Whitesell
> Network Manager
> Airpath
> "Clearing the Way"
> edw at airpath.com
> http://www.airpath.com
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Michel Renfer
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 4:25 PM
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Load balancing
> 
> Hi All!
> 
> We're currently looking at various load balancing solutions. Any
> comments/experiences regarding the Cisco CSS11500 series? Anyone
> using SLB on 72xx?
> 
> cheers,
> michel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/