Forum Discussion

BB1030_11211's avatar
BB1030_11211
Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
Jun 05, 2013

Access to Virtual server and pool configuration question, thanks!

Basically I have a pool of servers that will be listening on a port range 3000-3200 TCP plus HTTPS, I created a VS and pool, added members to the pool as I.E. 10.10.10.10:443 , 10.10.10.11:443 and so on, I can't spedify the port range (too large), would connections to the VS still be passed to the pool members on any of the TCP ports in the range mentioned even though I only specified :443 in the pool member configuration? the VS is allowing "all services * " I appreciate it.

 

config
design

6 Replies

  • nitass's avatar
    nitass
    Icon for Employee rankEmployee
    Jun 07, 2013
    if port number is not needed to translate (from vs port number to pool member port number), you can configure pool member with "any" port and uncheck (disable) "port translation" under vs configuration.
  • BB1030_11211's avatar
    BB1030_11211
    Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
    Oct 14, 2013

    Hi, thank you for the reply, one more question, I have a VS listening on a * any service for TCP, the real servers also need to listen of a range of UDP ports for the second part of the transaction, do I also need to create another VS to listen on UDP as service?

     

  • Kevin_Stewart's avatar
    Kevin_Stewart
    Icon for Employee rankEmployee
    Oct 14, 2013

    The VS won't natively do protocol translation. Do you really need to convert client side TCP to server side UDP?

     

  • BB1030_11211's avatar
    BB1030_11211
    Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
    Oct 14, 2013

    Hi, that's not what I meant, these are separate transactions, first users authenticate/request using a tcp session, then a file transfer is performed using udp, I setup a VS for the TCP part, do I need another VS for the udp part of the transaction? the tcp session seems to work fine, but when it comes to perform the next flow is when the transaction fails, all sessions need to be load balanced with session persistence, thanks for your attention again.

     

  • Kevin_Stewart's avatar
    Kevin_Stewart
    Icon for Employee rankEmployee
    Oct 14, 2013

    Yes, using a standard virtual server configuration, you'd need a separate VS for the UDP traffic. Can you use client source address for persistence? If so, you could create a source address persistence profile and set the "Match across virtual servers" option. Otherwise you'd some other pervasive value in both TCP and UDP requests to persist the traffic.

     

    Alternatively, depending on what you're trying to do at the proxy layer, a performance layer 4 VIP may also be an option as it supports an "* All Protocol" type.