Re: decent loadbalancing with 2 different ISP's with minimum risks

• Previous message: Kiran Maraju: "RE: decent loadbalancing with 2 different ISP's with minimum risk s"
• In reply to: Ravi: "Re: decent loadbalancing with 2 different ISP's with minimum risks"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

To: Ravi <ravivsn@roc.co.in>
Date: Sat, 08 May 2004 09:53:58 +0200

Le ven 07/05/2004 à 06:14, Ravi a écrit :
[about load balancing using VRRP]
> Scenario 1: A as Master, B as slave
> This is normal case where you achieve Auto Fail over.

Agree.

> Scenario 2: A as Master , B as slave with Virtual IP as VIP1 and also
> A as Slave and B as Master with virtual IP as VIP2
> In this case you would be running two instances of VRRPd. A group of
> machines will use VIP1 as gateway and a other one uses VIP2 as
> gateway.

Agree. Sometimes called blue/green VRRP.
2 VRRP circuits allows one to failover an already balanced load between
2 gateways, not to actually balance it. You achieve balancing exactly
the same way you would do it between two gateways _without_ VRRP.

> In this way load balancing is achived with scenario 2

You still need a device to balance the load between VIP1 and VIP2. A
downside router will see theses two VIPs as 2 different gateways and
still need to have a mechanism to choose which one to use for any packet
it sends, the same way it would have to choose between two regular
gateways (i.e. without VRRP).

-- 
http://www.netexit.com/~sid/
PGP KeyID: 157E98EE FingerPrint: FA62226DA9E72FA8AECAA240008B480E157E98EE
>> Hi! I'm your friendly neighbourhood signature virus.
>> Copy me to your signature file and help me spread!

• Previous message: Kiran Maraju: "RE: decent loadbalancing with 2 different ISP's with minimum risk s"
• In reply to: Ravi: "Re: decent loadbalancing with 2 different ISP's with minimum risks"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]