it_user434868 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director of Delivery at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
  • 0
  • 0

What needs improvement with Loadbalancer.org?

Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Loadbalancer.org.

What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?

PeerSpot user
8 Answers
Roger Seelaender - PeerSpot reviewer
UCaaS Engineering Manager at EarthLink
Real User
Top 5
Oct 19, 2022

The solution can be improved with the development of a SIP engine because it is difficult to manage SBCs. All SBCs are really tough to write rules for. If we could put this in front of an SBC to have the right rules to possibly block the traffic, that would be very helpful. The solution can also improve the relationship between Loadbalancer.org and Metaswitch, or now, Microsoft because Metaswitch was purchased by Microsoft. They both position themselves as certified but don't always talk to each other. I wish there would be closer integration between the solution and the vendors when either release new upgrades to their product line. Often we find issues on either end post upgrades.

Search for a product comparison
Ifra Texture Specialist at kyndryl
Real User
Top 20
Sep 9, 2022

The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging.

Senior Network and Security Specialist at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 10Leaderboard
Jul 6, 2022

I can’t think of any new features the solution really needs. The solution can be a bit pricey. The solution is designed more toward larger organizations and, therefore would be a bit expensive for smaller companies.

Kunle Oyetola - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Business at Zeta-Web Nigeria Limited
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Apr 1, 2022

I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly.

System Engeneer at CROC
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Jan 19, 2022

The price could be reduced. Loadbalancer.org's complexity could be reduced.

IT manager at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Dec 3, 2020

It doesn't have the bonding capability feature. I would like to see the bonding capability feature included and it should be easier to upgrade. The capacity that we currently have is 2G. If we could upgrade it using the same device, we could upgrade it twice without changing the hardware, that would be easier for us. It should be scalable without changing the hardware.

Find out what your peers are saying about Loadbalancer.org, HAProxy, F5 and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: December 2022.
657,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Pandiyan Regunathan - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Manager at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Apr 19, 2020

The configuration of Azure is a lot more simple than with Loadbalancer. It was very simple to configure it. There are many features you can set in the backend of Loadbalancer. They should simplify the configuration. The administrator should be able to configure it more simply. How it is now, you can only configure it if you have a lot of experience.

Patrick Louis-Jean - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a recruiting/HR firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
Feb 28, 2018

Obviously the simple ones like price. Make it cheaper, make it faster. Other than that, it's a spot-on product. It doesn't have any issues; no wishes or wants with it at all.

Related Questions
Deena Nouril - PeerSpot reviewer
Tech Blogger
Jun 16, 2022
Why or why not?
See 1 answer
Beth Safire - PeerSpot reviewer
Tech Blogger
Jun 16, 2022
Since Loadbalancer.org is an open-source solution, I would recommend this solution for smaller businesses that don’t have major scaling requirements and don’t have the budget for a commercial solution. Loadbalancer.org is straightforward to deploy and is generally easy to use. It performs well, with low latency and has been reliable for us. Loadbalancer.org is scalable, but scaling it requires installing a new appliance. We see that it handles up to 10,000 decisions each day. Loadbalancer.org is free, but there is an option to pay for premium support. I found that the premium support was very helpful and I would recommend paying for a support license. We only had to open one ticket in the past year, so that says something about Loadbalancer.org’s stability. Here are some of the benefits of Loadbalancer.org: Scalable with the correct hardware. Stable - Reliable and performs well. Low cost - open-source and free of charge. Here are a few issues that I feel could improve with Loadbalancer.org: In order to increase capacity, one has to buy new hardware. Lacks bonding capability. It would be great if Loadbalancer.org could make rules for specific shared bots. I rate Loadbalancer.org 7 out of 10. I would recommend Loadbalancer.org for some companies depending on their business requirements.
Network security at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Sep 15, 2021
Hello peers, I am looking for an independent comparative analysis of Kemp LoadMaster and LoadBalancer.org. Kind Regards
2 out of 5 answers
SaurabhPal - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Specialist - Network & Security at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Aug 25, 2020
1. Kemp Load Master only support SaaS whereas Loadbalancer.org support Windows, Mac & SaaS. 2. Both having Authentication, Automatic Configuration, Content Routing, Content Caching,Data Compression, Health Monitoring, Redundancy Checking etc facility.
Frank Yue - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Application Experience Architect at Kemp Technologies
Sep 16, 2020
Kemp LoadMaster is a vendor designed and supported load balancing platform focused on core load balancing technologies.  Kemp supports server load balancing (SLB) and global server load balancing (GSLB).  LoadMaster supports edge authentication including two-factor authentication, single sign on (SSO), Kerberos, and LDAP among other models.  Kemp LoadMaster also has the ability to provide fully functional web application firewall (WAF) services. LoadMaster is a software-based solution available as a VM for all major hypervisors, cloud marketplace (AWS, Azure, etc.) and hardware.  Kemp simplifies the load balancing technology through a simple to use GUI and over 80 templates for the most commonly used applications. Kemp is a global organization with 100,000+ deployments and the top rated load balancer on Gartner's Peer Insights with over 150 recent ratings: www.gartner.com/reviews/market/application-delivery-controllers LoadBalancer.org uses software based on opensource HAProxy and opensource Pound.  LoadBalancer.org also utilizes other opensource projects such as STunnel and Ldirectord.  You will get the features within the free HAProxy code (and others) with a LoadBalancer.org GUI.  This information is documented in their current Administration Manual:  http://pdfs.loadbalancer.org/loadbalanceradministrationv8.pdf This means that the functionality is dependent on the opensource community for updates and there will be a lag for these features to be rolled into LoadBalancer.org's product. From a performance perspective, both vendors probably have solutions to meet your needs.  I also believe that both solutions can support the applications that you plan to load balance.  The more important questions to ask yourself are 1) how easy it will be for you to configure and deploy the load balancing technology and 2) how painful will it be for you to manage and support the technology operationally. First, I believe that you will find both solutions relatively easy to deploy since both vendors focus on core load balancing functionality (SLB and GSLB).  Having said that, Kemp offers pre-built application templates for many commonly used applications to make the configuration that much easier: https://kemptechnologies.com/docs/.  Kemp focuses on making the work easy for the customer. Second, for operational support, I cannot speak for LoadBalancer.org's support organization, but Kemp's is stellar with a 99% customer satisfaction feedback rating.  As mentioned above, one concern for vendors that rely heavily on opensource code is the delay from an opensource project update to the time those changes get incorporated into a vendor's officially released and supported product.  We (the IT industry) have seen problems with this model on a regular basis throughout time.  A good example is the delay for all vendors as OpenSSL code was updated from 1.0.1 to 1.1 to 1.1.1 and all of the discovered security vulnerabilities with prior versions. Major caveat:  I work for Kemp.  Having said that, I have worked with load balancing technology for over 20 years (starting with Cisco Local Director), and have worked with, and for, multiple load balancing vendors.  My goal is to be factual.  I have sourced my data where possible and if I have not, I recommend that you fact check my information.  Ultimately, I believe with the correct data, you will make the right decision.
Download Free Report
Download our free Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Report and find out what your peers are saying about Loadbalancer.org, HAProxy, F5, and more! Updated: December 2022.
657,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.