URL redirect to different pool

I just thought about it and I put in miss information.

 

I would really like to add a 3rd member to the pool the VS is using. I need the rule to send client requests to this node based on the http://www.something.com and http://www.something.com/*

here is the host header irule, fwiw:

 

 

when HTTP_REQUEST {

 

switch [HTTP::host] {

 

www.site1.com {

 

pool pool_site1

 

persist cookie

 

}

 

www.site2.com {

 

pool pool_site2

 

persist cookie

 

}

 

www.site3.com {

 

pool pool_site3

 

persist cookie

 

}

 

default { reject }

 

}

 

}

I will try this out, but what is the default reject going to do?

The default reject statement will say that if the switch cases aren't matched, it will reject the incoming request. If that's not what you're looking for, you can modify the action there, or remove the default clause all-together.

 

 

Colin

So just to be clear:

 

 

I have a Virtual Server which resolves to several DNS names (www.abc.com, www.def.com, www.ghi.com). I have a pool of 2 nodes which currently the Load Balanced traffic is directed to. I want to take www.abc.com and send it to a different pool with a different node. All other requests should remain going to the default pool of the VS.

 

 

If I use the default reject, does that mean anything outside of the hosts defined are using the default pool?

 

 

 

VS. 192.168.80.100

 

Pool1 - 172.16.80.1 and 172.16.80.2(Default Pool for 192.168.80.x)

 

 

DNS (192.168.80.x) - www.abc.com, www.def.com, www.ghi.com etc)

 

 

 

Pool2 - 172.16.80.3 - Only traffic with the host www.abc.com or www.def.com should go here. All other traffic should go to Pool1

 

 

You don't need the reject statement. What that switch statement is saying is:

 

 

If I the HTTP Host address is "www.site2.com", send to pool pool_site2 and use the cookie persist profile.

 

 

If the HTTP Host address is "www.site3.com", send to pool pool_site2 and use the cookie persist profile.

 

 

If the HTTP Host address is neither of the above, reject the connection.

 

 

 

It sounds like you can remove the default section all together, and still have the functionality you want.

 

 

Colin

Please forgive me, I am brand new to this....

 

 

Do these rules assume that the url is formed exactly like the case? Example

 

 

www.myurl.mycompany.com is the same as myurl.mycompany.com as is myurl when referring to an internal name for an application.

 

 

is there a "like" argument that can include just myurl which should be inclusive of all 3 instances I listed above?

 

 

My problem is similar to the one above, however I am trying to switch on multiple levels.

 

 

Example:

 

 

myurl\servicegroup1\webservice1 - forward to pool 1

 

myurl\servicegroup1\webservice2 forward to pool 2

 

myurl\servicegroup2\webservice1 - forward to pool3

 

myurl\servicegroup2\webservice1 - forward to pool3

 

 

I have a complex group of webservices, some which need to be load balanced by "servicegroup" and others which need to be load balanced by the actual service. My current application includes 30 VIPS to accomplish these needs. I am attempting to use the LTM to consolidate these down to one VIP with an iRule which will send traffic to the appropriate pool. The example above is a good start, however my environment is slightly more complex and I need more information.

 

 

Any direction you can provide me is appreciated!