Is it true a load balanced VIP in front of UMS HA setup is not best practices/supported?


Doing research in this forum. Is it true a load balanced VIP in front of UMS HA setup is not best practices/supported? I saw conflicting answers


For the moment, on a supported way, we are speaking about a pure DNS Round Robin function. Technically speaking: it works, but not supported.


It “_works_” most of the time, but I have seen loadbalancers break so much. Especially when ICG is involved. For production I would recomend roundrobin DNS as Sebastien stated, IGEL cannot support a load balanced environment.


Thanks. I was planning on using LB for UMS HA setup, NO ICG at this time. If I an understanding UMS traffic flow correctly, LB would only be involved in the inital requests, but subsequent request would continue directly between actual UMS server & client.

I am used to leveraging a LB to balance Traffic. Comes with monitoring, manageability of traffic, etc… Just more efficient than DNS round robin. DNS round robin does not guarantee next request talk to host with least connections


It would be for registration. Once the IGEL connects to a standard UMS it will go direct. If you try to insert a load balancer between the IGEL device and UMS you risk breaking functionality


Okay well I would not want to risk functionality, but I am not seeing how.

Continue reading and comment on the thread ‘Is it true a load balanced VIP in front of UMS HA setup is not best practices/supported? ‘.  Not a member? Join Here!

Learn more, search the IGEL Knowledge Base



Ask a question or comment on the above messasge thread?

Join or log in to the IGEL Community to ask us anything and meet other IGEL customers, partners, and EUC enthusiasts.

Submit a question, or Join Today!


Popular Message Threads


Categories & Tags: