|
Apologies for the mail layout here...
Did the conversation go from load balancing dns to using dns to balance load? I
If the former, if dns is designed properly (helpful if phones are dhcp), then
dns would be inherently robust enough to handle it. I feel that adding hops to
measure response/status would be a feature without much benefit.
If the later, I agree that all of the above (ok, below) would need to be
satisfied. Also, throw persistence out the window.
-----------------
Sent from my NYPL BlackBerry Handheld.
----- Original Message -----
From: lvs-users-bounces
Sent: 10/13/2005 04:26 AM
To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list."
<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Using DNS as a load-balancer [was RE: talk by Radware, a commercial
loadbalancer]
Dan Trainor :
> Henrik Holst wrote:
> > But still, geographic load balancing would be very nice to have and I
> > cannot figure out another way to do it than involve DNS round-robin.
> I'm in the same boat here, still trying to think of a solution that
> works.
Well, Round-Robin DNS could work if :
- You have enough clients
- Clients are using DNS as expected
- Clients are dealing with TTL
- Clients DNS caches or provider DNS are honouring DNS TTL
- All your sites are always up and working (you can't use a DNS solution for
failover)
My clients are mobile phones, basically points 1 to 4 are not OK :). And I
have to deal with multiple sources for the same client (the transaction begin
in the gallery gateway and continues in the standard surf gateway, and I have
to use fwmarks to keep the session)...
We used RadWare to try to load-balance between our two peers. It clearly was
not working. Unfortunately, I don't have all the details.
François.
|
