cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Murali Reddy <>
Subject Re: CS Loadbalancer Features
Date Tue, 30 Oct 2012 07:19:40 GMT
On 29/10/12 9:48 PM, "Fuchs, Andreas (SwissTXT)"
<> wrote:

>Hi Murali
>Many thanks for your answers.
>>Can I ask what is the kind of deployment you are looking for? Do you
>>intend to provide LB as a service to the tenants (users)? If not, and
>>want fully leverage Haproxy or NetScaler's load balancing >functionality
>>then IMO, you can restrict CS router appliance to provide just DNS and
>>DHCP services, and setup  data path through gateway and load balancer
>>devices that you can control.
>Yes we like to deploy a LB service per tenant. Dreaming of something
>where CS is creating the service and real servers entries in the LB and
>then the tenant can connect to the LB and do all the fancy things the LB

Yes, you can do all that with CloudStack. CS does not expose all the finer
parameters of the load balancers but supports set of load balancing and
sticky methods. I guess you can use CloudStack load balancing
functionality if your needs can be met with what CloudStack supports.

>So if we create a Network Offering with NetScaler as LB provider, will CS
>create virt and real servers on the NetScaler and we can adapt then the
>settings on the NetScaler to our needs or is this also stateless and the
>config may get lost?

If you choose NetScaler as LB provider in network offering, CS will take
care of setting up VIP, virtual server, services etc on the NetScaler when
you apply load balancing rule from CloudStack. But if you change the
configuration on the NetScaler directly there is no guarantee that changes
will persisted. For e.g., lets say after changing configuration on the
NetScaler, if you add VM to the load balancer rule from the CS, CS may
update the configuration on the NetScaler which may wipe out the changes
you have done for that particular LB rule.

>So if I'm reading this:
>I have many more questions:
>- what's the advantage disadvantage of parallel vs. in-line mode
>- how are those modes configured, don't see where to configure

Functionality to support inline and side-by-side mode is missing in 3.x
and 4.0. There is an effort [1] to bring it back to 4.1 release. If you
use, in-line mode you get additional defence, where traffic goes through
the firewall before load balancer.

>If all this won't help, do we have to create a shared network offering
>without LoadBalancer feature and deploy the LB service ourselves?

Yes, you could do that with both isolated and shared networks.



View raw message