[load balancing] keeping load balancers seperate

From: tony bourke (tonyIZZATvegan.net)
Date: Tue Oct 31 2000 - 10:48:19 EST


Hi All,

As load balancers are continuously being integrated into larger Layer 2/3
switches, what do y'all think about that? Would you want a Cisco Cat 6500
to do all of your Layer 2-7 needs? Do you want to keep your load
balancers seperate?

I'm leaning towards keeping the load balancers seperate. Load balancers,
at least for now, are more unstable generally than Layer 2/3 switches. If
it's just a Layer 2 switch, you might never need to upgrade code or power
cycle it. Load balancers, on the other hand, often require continous code
upgrades to address one issue or another. You might never power cycle a
switch, but you'll power cycle a load balancer as often as once a week (or
more, I've seen)

Keeping load balancers seperate, even the switch-based load balancers,
also make it possible to put them in the Layer 3 path, instead of the
Layer 2 path, which simplifies redundancy and allows for greater
flexibility.

I often employ ArrowPoints or Alteons for load balancing. While they are
switches, I usually employ them as appliances, using only one or two
ports, depending on the configuration.

What do you all think? Talk amongst yourselves!

Tony

-------------- -- ---- ---- --- - - - - - -- - - - - - -
Tony Bourke tonyIZZATvegan.net



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Nov 05 2000 - 15:09:07 EST