Forum Discussion
NimbostratusRelation load balance with persistence
My English is very bad. I explain the situation, we use F5 to balance the traffic originated for users y destinated to internet.
On the F5 there are two routers, each with a link to the Internet. In F5 each router is a node, we created a pool with these two nodes, and we have used as a method of balancing ratio 1: 1. Subsequently, we have created a virtual server by default (source and destination 0.0.0.0.0 / 0) to consider all connections, and using the pool above, with persistence "dest_addr".
The problem is that the distribution of the connections is not fair, on router1 304 destinations, while the router2 are 3520.
The persistence ought to be more balanced, 1777 (approx) per router, can you help me to be more balanced, or maybe not quite understand the concept.
4 Replies
Max_Q_factorCirrocumulus
I think you might have to change the load balancing method, or at least get a better understanding of how your existing load balancing method is supposed to work.
Here is an overview of the different load balancing methods that you should be able to use in your ISP pool:
AliFishEstimated thanks, I would like to confirm with you (with the background information provided) if the behavior is anomalous?
- Max_Q_factor
If you have a load balancing method of something other than round-robin than the behavior may be normal.
A method like "least connections node" may produce those statistics because the F5 is making a load balancing decision based on the number of active layer 4 connections each time a new connection or session is being opened through the F5. This may be preferable as one ISP may get a lot of short lived connections, and the other ISP may end up with a lot of longer lived connections. So after some time it may appear that one ISP gets more traffic than the other, when in reality one ISP is getting more short lived connections but they are both load balancing roughly the same amount of layer 4 connections at any given time.
- nitass
Employee
The problem is that the distribution of the connections is not fair, on router1 304 destinations, while the router2 are 3520.
what are 304 and 3520? are they current connections, maximum connections, total connections or something else?
