Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

discuss - Re: [opennic-discuss] [UPDATE] Nearest Server Drama

discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org

Subject: Discuss mailing list

List archive

Re: [opennic-discuss] [UPDATE] Nearest Server Drama


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Julian De Marchi <julian AT jdcomputers.com.au>
  • To: discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
  • Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] [UPDATE] Nearest Server Drama
  • Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:53:56 +1000

On 10/06/15 10:28, Fusl Dash wrote:
> No, this is a different case here. As Julian already explained, the Linode
> loadbalancer does not act like nginx and therefore does not add an
> additional HTTP-Header (e.g. X-Forwarded-For/X-Real-IP/...), but instead
> just passes the raw TCP connection to the server itself...
>
> ... at least from what I understood from his email.

I'll explain a bit more. There are a few options with the nodebalancer,
http, https, tcp.

HTTP mode passes on the x-forwarded-for header. HTTPS does to. However
HTTPS does not perform SSL re-negotiation, so we are stuck if using that
option to one SSL site per nodebalancer only.

This is an issue with most "cloud" load-balancers, including AWS. I'm
unsure of cloudfare though.

A work around for this is to use the nodebalancer for our main site only
and then for the other SSL sites LB at the node to the pool of
webservers we have.

--julian



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page