Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[lvs\-users\]\s+LVS\s+and\s+Nat\s+question\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[lvs\-users\]\s+LVS\s+and\s+Nat\s+question\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: gary.gardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 09:38:31 -0700; Yes it is. Results as follows: ip addr show dev eth0 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:02:b3:ea:6a:02 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 98; /html/lvs-users/2012-11/msg00007.html (18,376 bytes)
2. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: "Ryan O'Hara" <rohara@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 10:27:24 -0600; Do you have IP forwarding enabled on the director? Try this: % sysctl net.ipv4.ip_forward Also, can you look to see that the VIP is actually assigned to your eth0 interface? Try 'ip addr show dev eth; /html/lvs-users/2012-11/msg00006.html (16,677 bytes)
3. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: gary.gardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 08:53:46 -0700; ipvsadm IP Virtual Server version 1.2.1 (size=4096) Prot LocalAddress:Port Scheduler Flags -> RemoteAddress:Port Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn TCP local:http wlc -> remote:http Masq 1 0 0 -> re; /html/lvs-users/2012-11/msg00005.html (15,524 bytes)
4. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: xavier pajona <xavierpajona@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 09:44:11 +0100; Hello Gary, Could you please type ipvsadm on the piranha server and give me the output ? Also the output of ps -ef | grep nanny With those informations I might be able to help. Best regards, Xavier O; /html/lvs-users/2012-11/msg00004.html (12,977 bytes)
5. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: Malcolm Turnbull <malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 08:47:26 +0000; LVS does not bind to a port, so netstat will not show it. Piranha is a RedHat product based on LVS you may not get support on this list. You also didn't answer the previous sensible questions. Why no; /html/lvs-users/2012-11/msg00003.html (12,984 bytes)
6. [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: xavier pajona <xavier.pajona@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 09:46:35 +0100; Hello Gary, Could you please type ipvsadm on the piranha server and give me the output ? Also the output of ps -ef | grep nanny With those informations I might be able to help. Best regards, Xavier -; /html/lvs-users/2012-11/msg00002.html (8,655 bytes)
7. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: gary.gardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 01:29:58 -0700; Ok I had to take a break from trying to configure Piranha so I could work on other things. But now I am back to it. Ok here's the problem. The Piranha is successfully pinging the real servers and I c; /html/lvs-users/2012-11/msg00001.html (11,673 bytes)
8. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: David Coulson <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 06:33:23 -0400; If you run tcpdump on your real servers, do they see any port 80 traffic? Do they have the VIP configured on their loopback, or a iptables REDIRECT rule in place to handle the traffic? Do you see ipt; /html/lvs-users/2012-10/msg00022.html (10,371 bytes)
9. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: gary.gardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:03:11 -0600; I think I am really dense or something because I cannot get this to work. Having said that, here is my configuration for doing Direct instead of NAT since it was suggested. The VIP is an external IP; /html/lvs-users/2012-10/msg00020.html (14,901 bytes)
10. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:21:38 -0700 (PDT); with DR, the RIPs are private (192.168.x.x). Each realserver has a non-arping VIP on lo. the VIP is an address the client can hit, usually a public IP Joe -- Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North C; /html/lvs-users/2012-10/msg00017.html (9,779 bytes)
11. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: David Coulson <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:17:39 -0400; Depends how your network is configured. If your real IP is 10.1.1.1 and your internal range is 192.168.1.0/24, then your traffic to the real servers will be entirely on 10.1.1.1 so as long as you're; /html/lvs-users/2012-10/msg00016.html (10,342 bytes)
12. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: gary.gardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:12:26 -0600; I thought with the DR that the backend web servers had to have real IP's so they could get out to the Internet? I had tried that and that didn't seem to work, but maybe it's just me. So the VIP shou; /html/lvs-users/2012-10/msg00015.html (12,111 bytes)
13. Re: [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: David Coulson <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:00:13 -0400; I don't see where you are doing NAT from your external range to your internal subnet, but that just makes it more complicated anyway. Why not just do DR between your load balancers and the backend we; /html/lvs-users/2012-10/msg00014.html (10,897 bytes)
14. [lvs-users] LVS and Nat question (score: 1): Author: gary.gardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:49:20 -0600; I have been search and searching and I can't seem to solve my issue. I have two load balancers that have real IP's that resolve to the domain name. I then have real servers that have internal IP's an; /html/lvs-users/2012-10/msg00013.html (16,273 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]