Forum Discussion
Joe_Willis_4776
Nimbostratus
Sep 22, 2008Default Gateway at Server level versus SNAT-AutoMap at VIP level
Hi,
I have what I hope to be a simple (and maybe a "duh") question. How expensive is it, in terms of CPU cycles, to assign a SNAT Pool of Automap to every VIP to enforce traffic to egress back through the LTM? The thought is to take this approach as opposed to changing the default gateway of all pool members to be the floating self IP address of the LTM.
Why do you ask? We are in a switched environment and in almost all cases, the LTM is not acting as the gateway for any VLAN (rather, a switch is relegated this task). Going the default gateway route, we end up with a lot of asynchronous routing. Sure, we can address the routing issue by adding static routes to all pool member servers to use the VLAN's "normal" default gateway. This has started to become a headache to manage though, and is why I am here.
So, to boil it down, it would be easier for us to put the default gateways back to the VLAN's "normal" gateway for all pool member servers. In addition, we would assign a SNAT-Automap to all VIPs to make sure that any traffic initiated from the LTM would egress back through the LTM.
What are the consequences of doing this?
3 Replies
- JRahm
Admin
We have several hundred mb/s flowing through a 3400 on 400 different virtuals (development box), all of which have their own snat address. CPU and memory are barely registering... - dennypayne
Employee
The other consequence is that you will no longer see the client's source address in the server logs, all the traffic will appear to come from the SNAT address. If this is not a concern for you then you're OK. But it tends to mess up WebTrends and such. You can insert the original client address in an X-Forwarded-For header (in the http profile), and depending on what the server is, you would have to configure it to log that as the client IP (there is an ISAPI plugin for IIS here on DevCentral). - Joe_Willis_4776
Nimbostratus
Thank you both for your replies; great information on how SNAT taxes (or rather, how it does not at all) the LTM; we have no where near 64k connections/second, so I think we should be in good shape.
Recent Discussions
Related Content
DevCentral Quicklinks
* Getting Started on DevCentral
* Community Guidelines
* Community Terms of Use / EULA
* Community Ranking Explained
* Community Resources
* Contact the DevCentral Team
* Update MFA on account.f5.com
Discover DevCentral Connects