I have been playing with them all for awhile now (F5, Alteon, Local Director, Etc.). I finally settled on Alteons products (I like the hardware based products). Unfortunately, I have a side contract, and they are concrete on using Windows Load balancing...Wait 'til they see the licensing on multiple Adv. Servers. I'll let you know how it turns out. As for the Alteon, Easy to setup and use and monitor. Good tech support too.
Thanks, Duncan Wallace 12835 SW Thunderhead Way Beaverton, Or. 97008 503-646-5707 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: John Chang [mailto:johnec@;umich.edu] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 3:50 PM To: Duncan Wallace Subject: Re: Windows Load balancing [7:56244] I read through MS's info on it and I thought it was chatty and wouldn't want to put it on a separate network. Use 2 nics, 1 for load balancing chatter. What hardware load balancing device have you used and how well did it work and how much approximately? Any I should stay away from? Thanks! At 08:48 PM 10/24/2002 +0000, Duncan Wallace wrote: >Has anyone had any experience in implementing Windows load balancing a >server cluster ? I have always used hardware based load balancers so I >am somewhat new to the MS flavor. I have a 2621 router and I am >wondering if it is capable of the following. This is just some >preliminary information gathering, so I thought I would throw it out to >the group while I do my own research. >What Windows 2000 Advanced Server says: >If Network Load Balancing clients are accessing a cluster through a >router when the cluster has been configured to operate in multicast >mode, be sure that the router meets the following requirements: >* Accepts an ARP > reply that has one MAC address > in the payload of the ARP structure but appears to arrive >from a station with another MAC address, as judged by the Ethernet >header >* In multicast mode, accepts an ARP reply that has a multicast MAC >address in the payload of the ARP structure >This allows the router to map the cluster's > primary IP address and other > multihomed addresses to the corresponding MAC >address. If your router does not meet these requirements, you can also >create a static ARP entry in the router. Cisco routers require a static >ARP entry because they do not support the resolution of unicast IP >addresses to multicast MAC addresses > . > > >Thanks in advance, > >Duncan Wallace >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=56253&t=56244 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
