4 Replies Latest reply on Jan 30, 2018 7:12 AM by ecklerwr1

    Netpath through an A10 Load Balancer

    Abdhija Sharma

      Dear All,


      We are trying to monitor a service path that contains A10 device in between. Can anybody explain as to what should be the expected behavior and outcome in this case?


      The actual physical topology is -

      After (Juniper Core switch), we actually have a switch and then the Load Balancer The Virtual IP of the Service is that sits on the Load Balancer to redirect traffic to a Real IP on service 443 that has been configured for the NetPath.


      NetPath Service has been created on the Virtual IP with service as 443.


      The topology depiction shown by NetPath is incorrect.


      cobrien request your asistance in the matter... What should be expected from a NetPath in a Load Balanced environment, in special consideration to A10 devices?


      RaviK csameer gangadhar.k devendrab

        • Re: Netpath through an A10 Load Balancer

          It depends how the load balancer is configured.  If the load balancer is transparently passing through traffic to various servers to host it, I would expect to see the servers.  If it's doing full proxy where the load balancer terminates the TCP session and creates a new one to the server, I would expect the load balancer to be recognized as the destination.  Here it looks like the destination according to the client is and the only thing that responds to that IP is the VIP so I would expect NetPath to consider that the end of the path.

          3 of 3 people found this helpful
            • Re: Netpath through an A10 Load Balancer

              Hi Chris,


              Thanks for your response. The LB here terminates the TCP session hence NetPath shows the VIP as the end of path. We are also observing some strange behavior on this NetPath service. Sometimes a very high latency number appears between the Load Balancer and the VIP. How could we identify the cause of the high latency? The A10 LB folks claim no such latency issues. Since Solarwinds is the new entity here, we are guilty till we provide evidence.