Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

postfix behind load balancers

Expand Messages
  • Robert Schetterer
    Hi @ll, has anbody experience with postfix behind load balancers im planning to test ha-proxy pen balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster in front of
    Message 1 of 4 , Oct 31, 2008
      Hi @ll,
      has anbody experience with
      postfix behind load balancers
      im planning to test
      ha-proxy
      pen
      balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster
      in front of postfix servers
      --
      Best Regards

      MfG Robert Schetterer

      Germany/Munich/Bavaria
    • Brian Evans - Postfix List
      ... The pro s and con s of load balancing has been discussed many times here. Search the archives for details. A different, and possibly better, way to handle
      Message 2 of 4 , Oct 31, 2008
        Robert Schetterer wrote:
        > Hi @ll,
        > has anbody experience with
        > postfix behind load balancers
        > im planning to test
        > ha-proxy
        > pen
        > balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster
        > in front of postfix servers
        >

        The pro's and con's of load balancing has been discussed many times
        here. Search the archives for details.

        A different, and possibly better, way to handle the load of mail is a
        simple round-robin DNS or multiple MX records of the same priority.

        A load balance setup can, and probably will, change the TCP source.
        This is important in the detection of mynetworks as well as the
        requirement for the XFORWARD command. Otherwise, Postifx will not know
        the true origination and always log the load balancer as the source.

        A poor load balance setup can possibly allow open relay.

        Brian
      • Mark Watts
        ... Direct-Server-Return load balancing would not suffer from this problem, but it s about as good as multiple MX s, and a lot more complicated to setup. We
        Message 3 of 4 , Oct 31, 2008
          On Friday 31 October 2008 13:22:27 Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
          > Robert Schetterer wrote:
          > > Hi @ll,
          > > has anbody experience with
          > > postfix behind load balancers
          > > im planning to test
          > > ha-proxy
          > > pen
          > > balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster
          > > in front of postfix servers
          >
          > The pro's and con's of load balancing has been discussed many times
          > here. Search the archives for details.
          >
          > A different, and possibly better, way to handle the load of mail is a
          > simple round-robin DNS or multiple MX records of the same priority.
          >
          > A load balance setup can, and probably will, change the TCP source.
          > This is important in the detection of mynetworks as well as the
          > requirement for the XFORWARD command. Otherwise, Postifx will not know
          > the true origination and always log the load balancer as the source.

          Direct-Server-Return load balancing would not suffer from this problem, but
          it's about as good as multiple MX's, and a lot more complicated to setup.

          We use multiple MX's here to good effect.

          Mark.

          --
          Mark Watts BSc RHCE MBCS
          Senior Systems Engineer
          QinetiQ Applied Technologies
          GPG Key: http://www.linux-corner.info/mwatts.gpg
        • Robert Schetterer
          ... Hi Brian, youre right but all the stuff you mentioned should be avoided therfor i had asked for practice experience with LB in running setups -- Best
          Message 4 of 4 , Oct 31, 2008
            Brian Evans - Postfix List schrieb:
            > Robert Schetterer wrote:
            >> Hi @ll,
            >> has anbody experience with
            >> postfix behind load balancers
            >> im planning to test
            >> ha-proxy
            >> pen
            >> balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster
            >> in front of postfix servers
            >>
            >
            > The pro's and con's of load balancing has been discussed many times
            > here. Search the archives for details.
            >
            > A different, and possibly better, way to handle the load of mail is a
            > simple round-robin DNS or multiple MX records of the same priority.
            >
            > A load balance setup can, and probably will, change the TCP source.
            > This is important in the detection of mynetworks as well as the
            > requirement for the XFORWARD command. Otherwise, Postifx will not know
            > the true origination and always log the load balancer as the source.
            >
            > A poor load balance setup can possibly allow open relay.
            >
            > Brian

            Hi Brian, youre right but
            all the stuff you mentioned should be avoided
            therfor i had asked for practice experience with LB
            in running setups

            --
            Best Regards

            MfG Robert Schetterer

            Germany/Munich/Bavaria
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.