[f-nsp] ServerIronXL 16 or 24 port questions..

[Emilia Lambros]

Can't say I've ever configured it without SLBs at each site.  We did it
slightly differently to the way they did it in any case:

Primary site:

two ServerIrons doing the following:
- regular load balancing for sub.domain.com.au across X web servers
(just http) .. the virtual and real servers are all in the same subnet
as the load balancer, so nothing fancy
- running gslb protocol
- virtual for DNS requests (the subdomain is actually delegated to the
dns virtual server that's configured on both the SLBs)


Secondary site

two serverirons doing the following:
- regular load balancing for sub.domain.com.au across X web servers
(just http) .. again, the virtual and real servers are all in the same
subnet as the load balancer
- running gslb protocol
- virtual for DNS requests (as per any DNS, the subdomain is delegated
to more than one name server - in this case those nameservers are SLBs.


As part of the GSLB config, the presence of every other load balancer is
configured into every other load balancer.  

e.g. at the primary site, we configured each location and what
serverirons are located there.  Through GSLB, the load balancers
discover what  virtual servers are on each and whether they're active or
not based on whether any real servers bound to it are active.  We also
set priorities in our case because we only want one of the IP addresses
to be given to the client requesting the site.  All servers have to be
failed at the primary site before the secondary site is given as a
response to anyone doing even an nslookup on sub.domain.com.au.

Its a little difficult to understand without being able to sift through
the config for yourself, but if I get a chance I'll "anonymous" it and
add it for you to take a look at :)

Em





-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Bellears [mailto:MBellears at staff.datafx.com.au] 
Sent: Thursday, 24 June 2004 10:45 AM
To: Emilia Lambros
Cc: foundry-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [f-nsp] ServerIronXL 16 or 24 port questions..

> 
> It very much depends what you're trying to achieve, but does this help

> any?
> http://www.foundrynet.com/services/documentation/siug/ServerIr
> on_GSLB.ht
> ml#71178

It certainly does.

If I read correctly, ServerIron performing DNS proxying, responds to the
requesting client a list of Sites, and also moves the geographically
closest site to the top of the list - Does the Server Iron performing
the DNS proxying also keep a state record of the serving sites servers?
If not, and all servers at GSLB Site 1 Sunnyvale(From the diagram) were
down, wouldn't the requesting client get page cannot be displayed error?

If it the ServerIron performing DNS proxying does keep state records of
serving sites servers, then I can see no reason why I would need a
ServerIron at each location?

Thanks for the information also!

Regards,
MB

> 
>  
> 
> Cheers,
> Em
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Bellears [mailto:MBellears at staff.datafx.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday, 24 June 2004 9:17 AM
> To: Emilia Lambros; foundry-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: [f-nsp] ServerIronXL 16 or 24 port questions..
> 
> Hi Emilia,
> 
> > 
> > The way I understood it when I researched it and
> subsequently set up
> > gslb, there needed to be ServerIrons at each location.
> 
> Wow! - Ok, so there is no other way to perform Global Load balancing 
> without having a ServerIron at each site?
> 
> Regards,
> MB
> 
> 
>