Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Inbound Load Balance Question

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved HA/CARP/VIPs
    6 Posts 6 Posters 4.7k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • R
      rneily
      last edited by

      I've got inbound load balancing setup with 2 servers behind a pfsense box.  It's operating nicely, no problems with the machines going down and the pfsense load balancer removing the downed box form the active pool.

      However, the one odd thing is that the number of incoming connections is not evenly distributed between the two servers in the pool.  Looking at the servers, I see up to 50 connections on one box, and only like 9 on the other.

      Is there a reason for this?  It's not a big problem, since the load balancer is working, but I thought round robin would pretty evenly distribute the connections between servers in the pool…. Just curious as to why?

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • H
        hoba
        last edited by

        I does this roundrobin. Maybe some of the connections are staying longer open than others? Check the statetable by viewing pftop from the shell/SSH for these connections and how long they are established already or how new connections are balanced.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • R
          rafael_r
          last edited by

          Anyone knows if features like "Weighted Round-Robin" "Least connections" or even "CPU Usage" for SLB will be implemented?

          Rafael.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • B
            billm
            last edited by

            @rafael_r:

            Anyone knows if features like "Weighted Round-Robin" "Least connections" or even "CPU Usage" for SLB will be implemented?

            Rafael.

            If/when PF supports them, maybe.

            –Bill

            pfSense core developer
            blog - http://www.ucsecurity.com/
            twitter - billmarquette

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • O
              Owen
              last edited by

              What would a suggested bounty for these features be?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • J
                jeroen234
                last edited by

                first you have to talk to the develpers of pf ( pf is the firewall of freebsd that pfsense uses)
                if they made that option in pf then the pfsense core team can make a option for pfsense to use it

                so unless pf adds those options there is no reasen for a bounty

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • First post
                  Last post
                Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.