From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 21 20:46:51 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8784D1065692 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:46:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tom@tomjudge.com) Received: from eu2sys200bog019.obsmtp.com (eu2sys200bog019.obsmtp.com [207.126.150.133]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B04968FC08 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:46:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tom@tomjudge.com) Received: from source ([63.174.175.252]) by eu2sys200bob019.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKSXeJuS6QFRwSTfkp7gae/nRjb7iDVMQ5@postini.com; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:46:51 UTC Received: from [0.0.0.0] (redeye.usdmm.com [172.17.0.14]) by bbbx4.usdmm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E25D3FD025; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:28:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <49778503.80506@tomjudge.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:26:43 -0600 From: Tom Judge User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Luiz Otavio O Souza References: <400557.75901.qm@web63903.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <9488116E9B3E48789DB4B688BBEFED13@adnote989> In-Reply-To: <9488116E9B3E48789DB4B688BBEFED13@adnote989> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: barney_cordoba@yahoo.com, Alexey Ivanov , freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CARP IP level load balancing X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:46:52 -0000 Luiz Otavio O Souza wrote: >>> Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2009, 9:30 AM >>> In FreeBSD there is only ARP level LB, that is in some cases >>> just not enough for load balancing. >>> Is there any plans to port IP level LB from OpenBSD, and, >>> if yes, will it be ported to 7x and 6x? >>> >>> In my opinion, full CARP realization is one step towards >>> LVS-equal functionality. >> >> Curious as to your specific needs. Is LAGG load balancing of no use >> at IP level? >> >> Barney >> > > hmm... with lagg you have two (or more) phisical connections sharing > the same ip, with carp you will have two (or more) servers sharing the > same ip. > > i think lagg will not help. > > i would like to give a try on carp ip balance, but i dont have the > time for now. i also like to known if someone else is working on this. > > Luiz > The way that we deploy IP level load balancing, we have 2 PF firewall routers on the network edge that handle the IP load balancing using round robin route to. (We are using direct sender reply) Then we have 2+ nodes with a carp address for each node, with backups on the other nodes. These carp addresses are the addresses used in the route to rule. The public IP's are assigned to the loop back interfaces of the application nodes and the default gateway of the application nodes is back out the PF firewalls. Here is a diagram to help explain: http://www.tomjudge.com/tmp/Diagram1.png AFAIK there is no Layer 3 load balancing support built in to carp in FreeBSD, however this solution will work if you have firewalls that can help you out with the distribution. Tom