Open Stack

   our stingray nodes don't allow you to specify. Its just an enable or disable option.
On May 1, 2014, at 7:35 PM, Stephen Balukoff <sbalukoff at bluebox.net<mailto:sbalukoff at bluebox.net>>
 wrote:

Question for those of you using the SSL session ID for persistency: About how long do you typically set these sessions to persist?

Also, I think this is a cool way to handle this kind of persistence efficiency-- I'd never seen it done that way before, eh!

It should also almost go without saying that of course in the case where the SSL session is not terminated on the load balancer, you can't do anything else with the content (like insert X-Forwarded-For headers or do anything else that has to do with L7).

Stephen


On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Samuel Bercovici <SamuelB at radware.com<mailto:SamuelB at radware.com>> wrote:
Hi,

As stated, this could either be handled by SSL session ID persistency or by SSL termination and using cookie based persistency options.
If there is no need to inspect the content hence to terminate the SSL connection on the load balancer for this sake, than using SSL session ID based persistency is obviously a much more efficient way.
The reference to source client IP changing was to negate the use of source IP as the stickiness algorithm.


-Sam.


From: Trevor Vardeman [mailto:trevor.vardeman at RACKSPACE.COM<mailto:trevor.vardeman at RACKSPACE.COM>]
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 7:26 PM
To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use Case Question

Hey,

I'm looking through the use-cases doc for review, and I'm confused about one of them.  I'm familiar with HTTP cookie based session persistence, but to satisfy secure-traffic for this case would there be decryption of content, injection of the cookie, and then re-encryption?  Is there another session persistence type that solves this issue already?  I'm copying the doc link and the use case specifically; not sure if the document order would change so I thought it would be easiest to include both :)

Use Cases:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ewl95yxAMq2fO0Z6Dz6fL-w2FScERQXQR1-mXuSINis

Specific Use Case:  A project-user wants to make his secured web based application (HTTPS) highly available. He has n VMs deployed on the same private subnet/network. Each VM is installed with a web server (ex: apache) and content. The application requires that a transaction which has started on a specific VM will continue to run against the same VM. The application is also available to end-users via smart phones, a case in which the end user IP might change. The project-user wishes to represent them to the application users as a web application available via a single IP.

-Trevor Vardeman

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




--
Stephen Balukoff
Blue Box Group, LLC
(800)613-4305 x807
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140502/57ad0673/attachment.html>