Re: LoadBalancing products: Cisco LocalDirector

["Stephen Sprunk" <ssprunk () cisco com>]

If you are using a LocalDirector with a Cat6k switch, you can enable the
Accelerated Server Load Balancing feature.  This allows the Cat6k to
forward the bulk of the flow (at wire speed), and lets the LD focus
exclusively on the connection setup/teardown functions.

For more information:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/localdir/ld33rns/l
dicgd/ld3_ch04.htm#xtocid1675521

S

     |          |         Stephen Sprunk, K5SSS, CCIE #3723
    :|:        :|:        Network Design Consultant, HCOE
   :|||:      :|||:       14875 Landmark Blvd #400; Dallas, TX
.:|||||||:..:|||||||:.    Email: ssprunk () cisco com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Karyn Ulriksen" <kulriksen () publichost com>
To: "'Bennett Todd'" <bet () rahul net>; "Karyn Ulriksen"
<kulriksen () publichost com>
Cc: <nanog () merit edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 11:40
Subject: RE: LoadBalancing products: Foundry ServerIron


> A friend of mine was using LD's on his service.  They do about 180mbps
over
> 3 locations and were running performance problems. (They ended up
moving to
> F5's).  One of Exodus's Senior Network Engineers has seen that
consistenly
> become problematic at about the magic 80mbps you mentioned.  I spoke
with a
> few different neteng buddies when we started looking at LB's over a
year ago
> and they all told me to stay away from the LD's.  But like all of us,
they
> get better as they stay around longer...
>
> Probably, it's the same with all LB products ... you have to match the
right
> products with your needs.  Me, I have to go for the big scale. So I'll
> sacrifice features for ability to consistently handle the traffic and
> scalability.  I eliminated quite a few simply because they couldn't
handle
> the volume, but that doesn't mean that they would work well for a site
> located in one of the big data centers.
>
>  -Karyn