<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 4/4/15 11:44 AM, Dmitri Pal wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:55203123.1030703@redhat.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/04/2015 12:30 PM, Nadav Mavor
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAN5Z3gO+hC3rMyP6BoG5JoEogZbNuBUzZSK5qnmyNmUPQia-Lw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>i use F5 and 3 IPA servers no big issues but some notes :<br>
</div>
1) as note you cant use it for kerberos<br>
<div>2) for the DNS we use group and not L/B do to the zone
serial (the zone serial num is not geting sync so if you
round robin you will get deferent zone num evey time and it
will mess up zone sync to external dns servers)<br>
</div>
<div>3) for the GUI (443) make sure to use stickiness so the
user wont get bounce after the login <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I did not quite get 2) above...<br>
Can you please describe it in more details?<br>
If you know how to make LB work with IPA's DNS and kerberos a nice
HOWTO wiki page would be really welcome!<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAN5Z3gO+hC3rMyP6BoG5JoEogZbNuBUzZSK5qnmyNmUPQia-Lw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Simo
Sorce <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:simo@redhat.com" target="_blank">simo@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">We use
SASL/GSSAPI/krb5 to authenticate clients to the LDAP
server.<br>
If you want to load balance by using a common DNS name in
front of all<br>
servers, you will need to deal with issues with krb5
authentication.<br>
<br>
At the very least you should add keys to all servers for a
principal<br>
named after the common name. However we do not test this
scenario and I<br>
am not 100% sure it works correctly when you factor in
that we use<br>
GSSAPI also for replication.<br>
<br>
Simo.<br>
<span class=""><br>
On Sat, 2015-04-04 at 22:16 +0700, Brian Topping wrote:<br>
> I believe LDAP can be load balanced without any
problem. It is a TCP<br>
> based protocol without persistent state between
transactions so it<br>
> should be just fine.<br>
><br>
></span><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
The reason I brought this up - <br>
<br>
been doing some testing with different LBs and well, some of them
seem to cause a lot of stuck/CLOSE_WAIT ports, while others don't.
My guess is I am just incorrectly configuring the ones that are
causing problems. But I guess too, I was wondering if there were
any known bugs in some LBs for others, that would cause issues?<br>
<br>
~J<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>