I researched this long ago and have been in touch with the author who ported
lvs to freebsd. Even if it did work well it doesn't support pfsync
(according to the author) which is a huge drawback. Once slbd is stable
pfSense will be nearly on par with what commercial firewalls offer (with
rega
On 9/1/05, Bill Marquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The scheduling is the difficult one...it really really needs to be part of
> PF before we can add it (and if it requires polling servers, I can guarantee
> it won't make it in). Bottom line is we aren't a load balancer, this wasn't
> a terrib
On 8/31/05, Randy B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Scott Ullrich wrote: > We have the source code to SLBD and have been making our own changes.Any intent to add some of the nice features ipvs offers (that slbddoesn't seem at first glance to), like multiple scheduling algorithms,
UDP, persistent connec
Scott Ullrich wrote:
Wait a second. I may be looking at the wrong thing.
Can you send a link of what ipvs is? I ended up on the linux virual
server page but now I'm wondering if your speaking of something else.
We are speaking of something of the same thing; I didn't do all of my
homework
On 8/31/05, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If it doesn't have those, I can imagine that some of those would be
> > non-trivial to add; maybe I'll have to dig in and try to make a
> > 3rd-party package for pfSense.
>
> That's the only way around the feature freeze but after looking at
On 8/31/05, Randy B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Scott Ullrich wrote:
> > We have the source code to SLBD and have been making our own changes.
>
> Any intent to add some of the nice features ipvs offers (that slbd
> doesn't seem at first glance to), like multiple scheduling algorithms,
> UDP, p
Scott Ullrich wrote:
> We have the source code to SLBD and have been making our own changes.
Any intent to add some of the nice features ipvs offers (that slbd
doesn't seem at first glance to), like multiple scheduling algorithms,
UDP, persistent connections, and such?
If it doesn't have tho
We use slb for it's monitoring code in the outbound load balancing as
well as for the inbound stuff. LVS won't help us there.
--Bill
On 8/31/05, Randy B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just noting that the current LB package used is sldb and that it's avery much dead project, actively seeking a new ma
On 8/31/05, Randy B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just noting that the current LB package used is sldb and that it's a
> very much dead project, actively seeking a new maintainer. I also note
> that ipvs is in ports. Any potential (future, of course) switch? I
> know the resource assigned might h
Just noting that the current LB package used is sldb and that it's a
very much dead project, actively seeking a new maintainer. I also note
that ipvs is in ports. Any potential (future, of course) switch? I
know the resource assigned might have to be me, but I was just curious...
RB
10 matches
Mail list logo
