The Radwares are okay for balancing http traffic, however they are terrible when it comes to dealing with many other types of traffic (especially media streaming). This is because instead of examining metrics and determining the optimal destination up-front, it follows a process of trial and error to find you the best destination (passive balancing as far as I'm concerned). The reason this works for http is because you don't only get one shot at getting it right the first time with it. Radwares tend to also "sticky" clients, resulting in unwanted side-effects. Also, if you need balance globally, you might be unhappy with the Radware proximity selection. The Cisco CSS is a great local load balancer, and coupled with a GSSM using dns-boomerang, makes an unbeatable global load balancing platform. IMHO / in my experience / your mileage may vary / etc. -----Original Message----- From: Kevin [mailto:kkadow@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 1:41 PM To: Adrian Cc: squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: hardware to load balance squid proxies? On 4/17/06, Adrian <adrian.jfl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm looking for a hardware solution to load balance a cluster of > squid proxies.. I'd love to hear from anyone who has experience > with this type of thing. We are a satisfied customer of Radware. While we are using a different product, Radware has their CSD (Cache Server Director) product for load-balancing caching proxies. > I'm looking at the Cisco LocalDirector - are there other good > options around? CSS 11500 offers features above and beyond the LocalDirector. Kevin
