We're using the Arrowpoint CS 100 which is no longer around. It's smaller than the ones you're referring to but it is just a wonderful device. And I agree that these things are very easy to configure. when it was first given to me I had no idea what it was but we had it up and running in no time. I've never seen anything this powerful that is this easy to configure. It's spooky. Those Arrowpoint engineers certainly had their stuff together. I hope Cisco doesn't screw them up too badly! John >>> "Allen May" 4/16/01 9:57:16 AM >>> CS-800 was the biggest box they had when I used it about 1 1/2 yrs ago so no I haven't used the 11500. If it's anything like the 800 then I would definitely recommend it. The way it load balanced was awesome too. You could choose between using round robin, sequential, or have it use a formula that based load on # of sessions, bandwidth, and overall utilization. That was very kewl! I haven't heard anything bad about the 11500. If you have any good links on the LVS I'd love to see them just to play with it at home. Later Allen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Young" To: ; Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 10:44 AM Subject: Re: Cisco ArrowPoint Intelligent Director and Linux Virtual Server [7:771] > Allen, > Thank you very much for the info. I understand the the CSS-800 box is > rock-solid. It is one of the big (ugly) box but very reliable in terms > of performance. However, my company will go with the CSS-11500. Again, > I don't know much about the product to make a recommendation. However, > I have to admit that the box is very easy to install and configure. > > Anyone experiences with the CSS-11500, I love to hear from you. > > Regards, > Sean > > > > >From: "Allen May" > >To: "Sean Young" , > >Subject: Re: Cisco ArrowPoint Intelligent Director and Linux Virtual Server > >[7:771] > >Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 10:35:44 -0500 > > > >I used Arrowpoint CS-800 boxes (before Cisco bought them) and it worked > >flawlessly for carOrder.com. As a matter of fact..it never exceeded 2% > >utilization even when we were broadcast on 20/20 and a couple of other > >broadcasts that caused massive traffic. I've never used LVS so I can't say > >which is better but I can say that unless Cisco messed it up, the > >Arrowpoint > >load balancer was the best I had ever seen. Make sure LVS can handle > >cookies and sticky sessions when comparing. I know the Arrowpoint can. Oh > >and I had never used an Arrowpoint before but it only took me a day of > >reading thru the manual and playing with it to realize how easy it was. > >It's noooooooooo problem. You can basically go through the book and follow > >the example (replacing IP addresses/subnets) and it works. Then for adding > >things like sticky sessions, etc, the manual was very useful in showing how > >this is done and why. > > > >Hope this helps. > > > >Allen > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Sean Young" > >To: > >Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 10:17 AM > >Subject: Cisco ArrowPoint Intelligent Director and Linux Virtual Server > >[7:771] > > > > > > > My company is in the process of deciding whether to go with Cisco > >ArrowPoint > > > Intelligent Director (ID) or building our own Linux Virtual > > > Server (LVS). From my limited knowledge, I know that Cisco ID is a > >load- > > > balanced device and many advanced features. I also have very limited > > > experiences with Cisco ID. Furthermore, I also understand that Cisco > > > ArrowPoint is derived from VXworks (a Unix variant) and the device > >itself > > > is running on a network appliance box (with 128 MB RAM and an IDE hard- > > > drive). > > > > > > On the other hand, I have quite extensive experience with Linux Virtual > > > Server (LVS). I know that LVS also support many similar advanced > > > features mentioned by Cisco ID (if I am wrong, please correct me). I > > > have deployed LVS in production environment for the past 18 months and > > > the LVS box is solid (never has to reboot once). However, management > > > would like to go with Cisco because it has the name "cisco" on the box. > > > They ask for my recommendations. At the moment, I can NOT recommend > > > Cisco ID because I am not that familiar with the product. Anyone who > > > has deployed Cisco ID on their production network with out breaking the > > > network, I would love to hear from you. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Sean > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=786&t=786 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
