From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org  Mon Jan 14 16:23:34 2019
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601F814A4C71
 for <freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:23:34 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from mark@exonetric.com)
Received: from relay.exonetric.net (relay0.exonetric.net [178.250.72.161])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C2169B5C
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:23:33 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from mark@exonetric.com)
Received: from [10.217.43.164] (unknown [109.144.220.20])
 by relay.exonetric.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C6AE22BBDD;
 Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:23:25 +0000 (GMT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Any suggestions for a layer 3 load ablancer for 12,
 as relayd doesnt work anymore
From: Mark Blackman <mark@exonetric.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (16C50)
In-Reply-To: <E1gj4tQ-000MGi-0H@dilbert.ingresso.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:23:24 +0000
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3D5F990E-5E0E-4B5C-9D9B-C0A1C1F7EDCB@exonetric.com>
References: <E1gj4tQ-000MGi-0H@dilbert.ingresso.co.uk>
To: Pete French <petefrench@ingresso.co.uk>
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 84C2169B5C
X-Spamd-Bar: ++++
Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [4.43 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[];
 RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[];
 TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MV_CASE(0.50)[];
 NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.84)[0.837,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain];
 DMARC_NA(0.00)[exonetric.com]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[];
 NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.83)[0.825,0];
 TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[];
 MX_GOOD(-0.01)[exonetric.com.in.heluna.com,exonetric.com.in.heluna.com,exonetric.com.in.heluna.com];
 RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.99)[0.989,0];
 R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[];
 FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[];
 MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+];
 ASN(0.00)[asn:12290, ipnet:178.250.72.0/21, country:GB];
 MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[];
 IP_SCORE(0.29)[ipnet: 178.250.72.0/21(1.23), asn: 12290(0.30), country:
 GB(-0.09)]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:23:34 -0000


> On 14 Jan 2019, at 16:15, Pete French <petefrench@ingresso.co.uk> wrote:
>=20
> So, until the middle of this afternoon I was, doing my load balancing usin=
g
> relayd from ports and PF. My own fault for not checking, but I upgraded
> one of the firewall pair to 12 and then discovered that the relayd port is=

> no longer available.
>=20
> Am now puzzling over solutions to this - I dont really want to stay on
> 11 forevere. Moving to OpenBSD to get their PF and relayd is a bit of
> an uncomfortable idea as we gain a lot from having one OS everywhere that
> people know, so does anyone have any suggestions ?
>=20
> PF round robin is not good enough for this as I have some dynamic problems=

> which indicate when a node is up or down. Relayd will check these, but the=

> basic PF wil not as far as I know.
>=20
> What do other people do ?

Use HAproxy for basic load balancing and Traefik for more sophisticated usag=
e. Not sure how you get seamless failover with either though. That was the n=
ice thing about relayd/PF

- Mark=