What's the improvement from Nlb.exe (Win2003) to the most recent o

Discussion in 'Clustering' started by Mr. Magoo, May 11, 2007.

  1. Mr. Magoo

    Mr. Magoo Guest

    Folks, I always knew from my personal experience that Microsoft NLB is not a
    recommended load balancing and failover solution for mission critical
    systems, especially when I expect up to 10,000+ users to connect to my
    servers.

    My question is, can someone confirm whether the below statement (published
    on April 2006) still is true for the most recent version of Windows (R2 and
    Longhorn)? I think it is, but I'd appreciate if someone can confirm that the
    most current nlb.exe hasn't had any major improvement and it reflects the
    truth outlined below. By the way, I thank Microsoft for the honesty of
    publishing the information below.



    A note about NLB
    Using hardware load balancers is strongly recommended. Microsoft Windows®
    NLB may be used for evaluation, test, and pilot systems or for small,
    nonmission critical deployments.

    There are limitations with using NLB:

    1.
    Remote administration using the Live Communications Server snap-in is not
    supported. The front-end Enterprise Servers will have to be managed by
    running the administrative snap-in locally and not from a remote computer.

    2.
    Multiple pools within an organization are not supported.


    When using NLB, be aware of the following:

    • NLB depends on the network and operating system being available on each
    server; and not on whether the server is running the Live Communications
    Server. There may be instances where NLB continues to route connections to a
    server–even when the Live Communications Server service is not running.

    • Routing of connections is static and independent of server load or
    occupancy. It is not based on latency, or the server with the fewest
    connections.

    • All packets are forwarded to all servers, and only one server will process
    the packet. This approach has implications on scaling and performance of the
    servers and needs careful consideration.
     
    Mr. Magoo, May 11, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Could you provide the source of the information quoted below? Many
    Microsoft CSS / PSS folks [Chuck, Alan and others] read these groups and
    could provide additional insight / input as to whether or not the
    information referenced might be outdated or should simply be refreshed.

    --
    Ryan Sokolowski
    MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
    MCSE, CCNA, CCDA, BCFP


    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
     
    Ryan Sokolowski [MVP], May 11, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.