Re: [load balancing] Global Load Balancing with CSS

From: David Cyrille (dcyrilleIZZATeasynet.fr)
Date: Thu Jun 26 2003 - 13:47:31 EDT

  • Next message: Dana Quinn: "Re: [load balancing] Global Load Balancing with CSS"

        Hi,

    you can have a look Speedera too.
    I'm using Akamai, and it's pretty powerful when you get up to the
    application layers (caching of dynamic webpages, etc).
    If you plan to do some GSLB for static content, *I think* any of the quoted
    competitors can do the job well. ;-)

                    Regards,
                                David.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Massar, Marc" <MMassarIZZATlinkpoint.com>
    To: <lb-lIZZATvegan.net>
    Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:49 PM
    Subject: RE: [load balancing] Global Load Balancing with CSS

    > Three possibilities as far as services that I know of...
    > InterNAP
    > Akamai
    > Digital Island
    >
    > I love InterNAP. Only used Akamai for content caching...but it was
    > good. Never used Digital Island, but it sounded similar to Akamai's
    > overlay load balancing concept.
    >
    > -Marc
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Dana Quinn [mailto:danaIZZATnextbus.com]
    > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 10:11 AM
    > To: lb-lIZZATvegan.net
    > Subject: Re: [load balancing] Global Load Balancing with CSS
    >
    >
    >
    > I implemented a partial global load balanced site a few years
    > ago - late fall 2000 into 2001, and I think the limitations
    > were fairly well understood then. We used the F5 solution, and I
    > remember having detailed discussions with some of their
    > tech people about DNS caching issues, including DNS caching
    > problems in various versions of Internet Explorer.
    >
    > I said a 'partial' site because the global load balancers
    > were mainly used to do a datacenter move -
    > it allowed us to slowly shift traffic over a couple months.
    > We saw various client systems that continued to cache our old
    > DNS results one way or another for weeks, even months. :(
    >
    > Anyway, I agree that using some sort of BGP-based multi-homing
    > is a better way to survive most common failures, but setting
    > up and running BGP requires a strong committment in staff
    > and equipment. The little content company I worked for at the
    > time I worked in this realm wasn't too interested in going that
    > far.
    >
    > Does anyone on list have experience with using network
    > service providers that help to manage BGP-like multi-homing
    > for web sites? I'm thinking of InterNAP, mainly, or other
    > companies that provide similar services. I'd be interested
    > in hearing how they work out for people.
    >
    > Dana
    >
    > David Taylor wrote:
    > >> May I ask how you moved away from the GSLB solution? We do it to
    > >> get around points of failure like the network connection/ISP,
    > >> and other single points of failure at one site.
    > >>
    > > We did indeed go for a failover situation and built our primary site
    > to
    > > be as resilient as possible. It gave us quite a shock to discover the
    > > limitations of GSLB at the time (probably 2 or 3 years ago now) as we
    > > had largely implemented a hosting environment that relied on GSLB -
    > the
    > > failover approach is nowhere near as elegant as an active / active
    > > approach.
    > >
    > > At the time, the DNS caching limitation of GSLB did not seem to be
    > > widely recognised.
    > >
    > > Our ultimate approach was to accept that in the event of total loss of
    >
    > > the primary site, our service desk would need to anticipate a high
    > > volume of customer calls and would need to be able to manage customers
    >
    > > who required assistance with refreshing DNS caches. Not ideal, but for
    >
    > > the company an acceptable solution.
    > >
    > > In hindsight. had we been aware of the GSLB issues, we may well have
    > > designed our environment using our own physically seperate datacenters
    >
    > > and BGP with upstream ISPs. In my view, for ultimate availability, IP
    > > addresses must be completely static to the customer, regardless of
    > what
    > > goes on in the hosting network.
    > >
    > > Regards
    > >
    > > David
    > >
    > > _________________________________________________________________
    > > Surf the net and talk on the phone with Xtra Jetstream IZZAT
    > > http://www.xtra.co.nz/products/0,,5803,00.html !
    > >
    > > ____________________
    > > The Load Balancing Mailing List
    > > Unsubscribe: mailto:majordomoIZZATvegan.net?body=unsubscribe%20lb-l
    > > Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
    > > LBDigest: http://lbdigest.com
    > > MRTG with SLB: http://vegan.net/MRTG
    > > Hosted by: http://www.tokkisystems.com
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > Dana Quinn, danaIZZATnextbus.com
    > NextBus Information Systems
    > (510) 420-3117
    >
    > ____________________
    > The Load Balancing Mailing List
    > Unsubscribe: mailto:majordomoIZZATvegan.net?body=unsubscribe%20lb-l
    > Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
    > LBDigest: http://lbdigest.com
    > MRTG with SLB: http://vegan.net/MRTG
    > Hosted by: http://www.tokkisystems.com
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ____________________
    > The Load Balancing Mailing List
    > Unsubscribe: mailto:majordomoIZZATvegan.net?body=unsubscribe%20lb-l
    > Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
    > LBDigest: http://lbdigest.com
    > MRTG with SLB: http://vegan.net/MRTG
    > Hosted by: http://www.tokkisystems.com
    >
    >

    ____________________
    The Load Balancing Mailing List
    Unsubscribe: mailto:majordomoIZZATvegan.net?body=unsubscribe%20lb-l
    Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
    LBDigest: http://lbdigest.com
    MRTG with SLB: http://vegan.net/MRTG
    Hosted by: http://www.tokkisystems.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 26 2003 - 13:47:05 EDT