Hi Ed, Good idea. We will give it a try.
Thanks, Hongjun From: Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagb...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 12:04 AM To: Ni, Hongjun <hongjun...@intel.com> Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io; Li, Johnson <johnson...@intel.com> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] Requirement on Load Balancer plugin for VPP Hongjun, Thinking it through a bit, there are *many* different approaches to load balancers. I would suggest if you want to support a different one, then starting a new plugin for it may be a good move :) Ed On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 8:04 PM, Ni, Hongjun <hongjun...@intel.com<mailto:hongjun...@intel.com>> wrote: Hi Ed, Thanks for your prompt response. This item is required to handle legacy AS, because some legacy AS does not want to change their underlay forwarding infrastructure. Besides, some AS IPs are private and invisible outside the AS cluster domain, and not allowed to expose to external network. Thanks, Hongjun From: Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagb...@gmail.com<mailto:hagb...@gmail.com>] Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:44 AM To: Ni, Hongjun <hongjun...@intel.com<mailto:hongjun...@intel.com>> Cc: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>; Li, Johnson <johnson...@intel.com<mailto:johnson...@intel.com>> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] Requirement on Load Balancer plugin for VPP Hongjun, I can see this point of view, but it radically reduces the scalability of the whole system. Wouldn't it just make sense to run vpp or some other mechanism to decap the GRE on whatever is running the other AS and feed whatever we are load balancing to? Forcing back traffic through the central load balancer radically reduces scalability (which is why Maglev, which inspired what we are doing here, doesn't do it that way either). Ed On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Ni, Hongjun <hongjun...@intel.com<mailto:hongjun...@intel.com>> wrote: Hey, Currently, traffic received for a given VIP (or VIP prefix) is tunneled using GRE towards the different ASs in a way that (tries to) ensure that a given session will always be tunneled to the same AS. But in real environment, many Application Servers do not support GRE feature. So we raise a requirement for LB in VPP: (1). When received traffic for a VIP, the LB need to do load balance, then do DNAT to change traffic’s destination IP from VIP to AS’s IP. (2). When returned traffic from AS, the LB will do SNAT first to change traffic’s source IP from AS’s IP to VIP, then go through load balance sessions, and then sent to clients. Any comments about this requirement are welcome. Thanks a lot, Hongjun _______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
