nanog mailing list archives

Re: Experience with Open Source load balancers?


From: Hammer <bhmccie () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 12:02:51 -0500

Mattew,
      We run high volume SSL but not nearly the 12Gbps you are talking about
so that hasn't been an issue for us. Thanks for the information. Looks like
the Citrix ANG rep owes me another lunch to explain himself. :)

I'm gonna do some research on NGINX...


 -Hammer-

"I was a normal American nerd."
-Jack Herer





On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Andreas Echavez <andreas () livejournalinc com
wrote:

We're using both an F5 BigIP as well as Nginx (open source software) in a
production environment.

They both have their merits, but when we recently came under some advanced
DDoSes (slowloris, slow POST, and more), we couldn't process certain types
of layer 7 insepction/modification because it was too heavy for the F5 to
handle. Nginx was more cost effective because we could scale laterally with
cheap commodity hardware.

This isn't a knock on the BigIP though; it's a much better piece of
equipment, has commercial support, and a fantastic web interface. With
Nginx
you might find yourself compiling modules in by hand and writing config
files.

Ultimately, the open source solution is going to stand the test of time
better. It all depends on who's paying the bills, and what your time is
worth. Nginx was specifically worth the effort for us because we had unique
traffic demands that change too quickly for a commercial solution.

Thanks,
Andreas


On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Welch, Bryan <Bryan.Welch () arrisi com
wrote:

Greetings all.

I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing
software against commercially available off the shelf hardware such as
F5,
which is what we currently use.  We use the load balancers for
traditional
load balancing, full proxy for http/ssl traffic, ssl termination and
certificate management, ssl and http header manipulation, nat, high
availability of the physical hardware and stateful failover of the tcp
sessions.  These units will be placed at the customer prem supporting our
applications and services and we'll need to support them accordingly.

Now my "knee jerk" reaction to this is that it's a really bad idea.  It
is
the heart and soul of our data center network after all.  However, once I
started to think about it I realized that I hadn't had any real
experience
with this solution beyond tinkering with it at home and reading about it
in
years past.

Can anyone offer any operational insight and real world experiences with
these solutions?

TIA, replies off list are welcomed.


Regards,

Bryan





Current thread: