Cisco Application :: SIP Load Balancing With ACE 4710?
Nov 8, 2011
SIP Load balancing Issue with ACE 4710?I have a Cisco ace 4710 with vesion Version A4(2.2). i configued simple SIP load balancing first without stickiness. without stikeiness we are having a problem because bye packet at the was not going to the same server all the time that left our port in used even though user hang up the phone. its happen randmly. i have a total 20 licenced ports and its fill out very quickly. so i dicided to use the stickiness with call-ID but still same issue. below is the config
rserver host CIN-VOX-31
ip address 172.20.130.31
inservice
rserver host CIN-VOX-32
ip address 172.20.130.32
inservice
We have two Cisco ACE 4710 and we want to install both of the devices in HA with load balancing mode.While i have done HA mode configuration between ACE 4710.But unable to configure load balancing configuration between them.i want to tell you connectivity between server,client & loadbalancer.Our Web servers are connected to VLAN 152 on the L3 (3750) switch.Which are alreday working in redundancy between other L3.And ACE 4710 it is also connected to vlan 150 which are connected to same L3 (3750) switches and users are also connected to vlan 6 on the same L3 itself.
I am performing a deployment, in which i require clarity on the following. Our setup has DC and DR , in each site we have two devices for HA.We have received One SSL Certificate from Public CA, Kindly clarify the following doubts i have on thisIn Doc, i found Cert.pem and key.pem is required to generate the pair ,do i receive both Cert.pem and key.pem from the CA or we can generate key.pem from Cert.pem ?SSL Offloading is planned for the X application, and it is running in both DC and DR ( Considering each having their own Public IP address ) , do i need to have two different public certificates or a single certificate can i use in both DC and DR.Load Balancing IssueIs it possible to configure in ACE to access the service in Business hours and in non Business hours to display HTML page showing this is available only during these hours ?In DC we have Three Web Servers ( only in One physical server the service is active, other two are backup ), and these three servers are under cluster and shares one cluster IP , In ACE we have created the VIP and Pointed to only Cluster IP ( like pass through only ). The issue we face is if active web server is down, even then ACE is sending the traffic to that webserver only instead of sending it to the new Active web server. let us know if any solution is there to overcome this issue ?as per my understanding instead of giving cluster IP as real server IP we can issue the three physical servers. now i dont require load balancing between three servers instead require failover king like if first server is down then it should forward to Second server ?
To start with following is our architectural request flow:
Load Balancer --> Webseal /(reverse proxy) --> HTTP Server --> Portal Server
We have Hardware Load Balancer Cisco ACE20. When we access our portal from Webseal server it works totally fine without any issue, but when we access the same application using ACE we face the following issues:
1) Some of the links on do not work. For eg: We have a link "subscribe" which points to [URL], whenever we click on this link, the request is directed to [URL] i.e homepage
2) URL redirection does not work We have some links which have a url forwarding or redirection for example when we open [URL] it forwards the requests to [URL] opendocument....., but this redirection fails and again the request is thrown to homepage i.e., [URL]
3) The response of the request and the overall portal when accessed via ACE is very sluggish and it takes 20 seconds for homepage to load, whereas the homepage loads in 4 secs when accessed via webseal.
I'm running an ACE 4700 appliance, i have a 4 server serverfarm setup, non-ssl, with leastconns predictor...i have tried round robin as well, and nothing...
I've taken each rserver out of service, and placed back in, and still, the traffic is handed off only to 1 server...
We have a pair of CSS 11501,Currently it is using source ip for load balancing and 5 servers as backend , however we have users loggin in using http and based on its source IP (ISP PROXY) , it is forwarded to SERVER A.However, we have a SSL page and when the client switches over to SSL , it is forwarded to SERVER B/C/D/E based on its source IP ( REAL CLIENT IP) .This will cause the user to be terminated as the 5 servers are independent and not running in a cluster.
Is there any way that we can use the X-Forwarded-For address to load balance so that when users loging , they are sent to SERVER A (Based on X-Forwarded-For Header IP which translate to REAL CLIENT IP).This way we are able to also send it back to the same server when it uses SSL.I believe that we should be able to load balance using X-Forwarded-For IP or to rewrite the X-Forwarded-For IP into client source IP.
is there a possibility to get a load balancing across two rservers so: when client sends http://vip/ and it goes to rserver1 then url is sent without change when client sends http://vip/ and it goes to rserver2 then url is modified to http://vip/xyz/
Or maybe load balancing can be done across two serverfarms ?
We are in the situation we have a active configuration with ACE30 doing normal load balancing in routed mode, we have tons of rservers going out on a VIP.we now had to add a new private network to a provider that strangely enough does not want to see our public or private addresses. we need to loadbalance towards him on a priovided subnet (still rfc1918) (IOS VRF bug? is that correct?)I have two options, add the network (new interface) to the active loadbalancers (contexts) and then tie in new policies to the active serverfarms or make a new context just to load balance towards this provider.(preferred)Now - If I do this, the rservers see the client source addresses from this new provider. as the loadbalancer does not "hide" the client IP's. I would then have to add static routers toward the new context - I would want to skip that.
is there a way, to make the loadbalancer hide the client addresses towards the rservers ? perhaps I'm just needing the correct search term to find the config example.
Experienced the same sort of behaviour with an ACE 4710 version A3 (2.5). When trying to connect to a webpage on port 443, the pages over 1 minute to download fully. I have timed the download using the plug-in firefox. What is strange is that the browser successfully makes the connection, 200OK etc, but each 'get' takes a very long time to transfer. If I go directly to the server and don't pass via the ACE the page takes between .7 and 1 second to transfer.Is there a way to speed this transfer up, I am currently looking at connection maps.
We are using Cisco ACE 4710 for load balancing the servers. The predictor used is 'least connections'.Have observed the below;The number of connections for a particular server in a serverfarm is 15 in the Cisco ACE.The actual number of users in that server is 6.All the users access using the VIP.Still i couldn't understand why there is difference in the number of users in the server and the load balancer statistics.
I am configuring a load balancer from cisco, a ACE 4710.Load blancing is completely new to me, and i am unexpereinced in this field. It has to be configured for a customer that want to load balance HTTP and RTSP traffic over 4 application servers (Back-end),I searched alot on google for possible solutions, and got RTSP in some way to work, but http wont work says my customer.
Have two ACE 4710 in HA setup. We would like to setup HTTPS loadbalance(actually just a primary and standby configuration in the serverfarm). Initially this would be for Exchange OWA connections but may expand to more HTTPS connections later. I know there are several ways to do SSL with the ACE( client, server, end-to-end). I am just wanting to know the easiest way to deploy this? Is a certificate always needed on the ACE for each connection? In HA mode would a certificate be needed for both or does it replicate in some way to the other ACE?
I am trying to configure ACE 4710 to load balance base on the URL, If it matches the specific URL ( /456/ ), the traffic will be sent to server farm 456 else the traffic will be sent to server farm 123.
I attached an image of the topology.
Ace Config:
rserver host SRV01_123 ip address 192.168.1.101 inservice
I've done a lot of ACE work over the years but this is the first time this has ever come up.
I have a request from an application group where I have 3 rserver in the server farm but they want all traffic to only go to the first server unless that server fails. If the first server fails, only then do they want traffic to go to the 2nd server instead and if that fails, then traffic goes to the 3rd.
I've read through the documentation but haven't figured out a way to do this. What to do this type of failover configuration?
Our Exchange 2010 hub servers run multiple services/ports: smtp, www, pop3,135, 143, https, 993, 995, 6001,6002,6003,60200,60201,8400, and 8402 what is the best way of balancing these servers so that if only one of the services failed on a server, it would switch only the failed service to remaining servers. At present I only use an smtp probe, so as log as that sevrice is running the server is marked good.
Physically, it's like this. The RED line denotes a boundary, and pretty much anything North of that is not accessible to us, we simply have a L3 trunk between our switches and "their" switches (S3/S4) and talk using EIGRP.
There are other servers in the top tier, some that also require load balancing, some that don’t. Typically, I want to load balance HTTPS requests from the internet, to one of the 3 servers in the top half.
I’m not sure what mode to select, routed, one arm? What about placement of the ACE? At the moment, I’ve just configured 1/1 on it and made it part of the MG MT VLAN, it's S VI exists on the S1/S2 switches, so I’m open to change as it's still all in the lab.
I'm trying to design a CSS configuration that allows servers in the same vlan to be the source and destination of load-balanced traffic. My thought is to add two new vlans, one for the VIPs and one for the servers, then NAT the source IPs going from the LB to the servers.
Is this the right way to do it?I've never NATted using CSSs, so I wanted to verify what I'm thinking.Our current config trunks the vlans -
Report run via Individual Web server URL’sThe report takes less than 20 minutes (average 15 minutes) to fetch and return the data. This is observed 9 out of 10 times.Report run via ACE Load Balanced URLThe report keeps on running for more than 20 minutes and never completes. The front end keeps showing report is running.The data in general when tested directly by running queries against the database (bypassing the platform) completes in 15-18 minutesThe network connectivity for each and every ports involved (Loadbalancer/Servers) have been throulgly checked.
i'm trying to accomplish the following:I want to trasport a bunch of vlan layer 2 etherchannel on a pair of layer3 connections, using L3 to load balance.i was considering a pair of options:
1) bridging + gre (non applicable since i cant bridge 2 interface beloging to a etherchannel to a tunnel)
2) L2TP is it possible to accomplish this with the above tecnology? any reference, configuration example?
3) AoMLPS is it possible to accomplish this with the above tecnology ? any reference, configuration example?
I cant modify topology, the routers used are ASR1001 It is mandatory that both sites have a layer2 connection between them.
I have a Cisco 2811 router with two HWIC-ADSL cards configured for dsl connection. I have two lines from the same ISP and i am load balancing between them. I have created a couple of SLA's to check the state of the connections and add to the routing table the two default routes if both are up or any one of them is up.My problem is that when i try to download big files (especially antivirus updates) the download at some point stops (especially the antivirus exits with an error of unreachability). If i shut down one line everything works fine.Could i use something (configuration-wise) to prevent this problem from happening?????Is there any way i can combine the two lines? They are simple ADSL connctions with static ip's.
One of our customer just purchased ASR1002 router, they have three internet links from different ISPs and they dont have any remote site, they have three different public IP pool as their respective ISPs. So, is it possible to load balance the internet traffic using all three link on Cisco ASR router ( IOS - Advance Enterprise Services)
I need to configure DSL Load Balancing on Core Cisco Switch 4506-E. I have a Router Cisco 2811 with 2GE Ports and a Firewall Cisco ASA5505. I have 8 Physical DSL Connections with 1Mb each. I need to combine that 8 Mb on Core Switch and allow each end user to access the Internet via the available DSL connection which means that every user has 8 Mb available.
We have an ASA5520 pair that we will be installing to load balance SSLVPN connections. Below is a portion of our configs pertaining to the VPN load-balancing feature (configured on both ASAs):My specific question is related to routing of return traffic to load-balanced VPN sessions. Is there some kind of persistence function that tells the return traffic which ASA to route back to? For instance, if ASA1 has a VPN connection having IP address 10.211.112.1 associated to it, and ASA2 has a VPN connection having IP address 10.211.112.100, how does the return traffic for each connection know which ASA to route back to?
Currently we have deployed site to site vpn between 2 asa 5510 model. one is corporate site and one is remote site. now we plan to use radware load balancer in which 2 isp will terminate. now if at a remote site wecreate only 1 ipsec tunnel and mention sigle isp peering. if one isp fails at corporate how remote site will be access by site to site vpn through 2 isp vpn. what thing we need to do over asa as well as load balancer at both end.
