|
Joseph Mack wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Wensong Zhang wrote:
>
> > Anyone who have tested or are going to test it, please let
> > me know the result, no matter it is good or bad. :-)
>
> my initial test ran into trouble because I couldn't get up LVS
> correctly. I have an ssl-httpd on my director box (I have one
> real server at home and one director, I can't move the ssl-httpd
> to the real server as one is libc5 and the other is libc6 and
> I get a segv). The only LVS I can set up then is a director
> operating in localnode mode and no real servers.
>
> As a preliminary test, I started a regular httpd and an ssl-httpd
> on 192.168.1.110 and put the (tunneling LVS) into localnode node with
>
> root@di://usr/local/etc/httpd/conf:120# ipvsadm -L
> ippfvs (LinuxDirector) version 0.9 (Tunneling, LocalNode, WRR, size=4096)
> IP Port Forwarding & Virtual Server Table
> Protocol Local Addr:Port ==>
> Remote Addr Weight ActiveConns
> TotalConns
> ...
> TCP 192.168.1.110:80 ==>
> 127.0.0.1 1 0 1
> TCP 192.168.1.110:443 ==>
> 127.0.0.1 1 0 3
>
> I could connect directly to the http and https urls from
> the director box both with and without LVS. I expected
> that when I activated LVS with ipvsadm that I would no
> longer be able to connect from the director and I would
> then have to use a client outside the LVS.
>
> Is it possible to test LVS when I only have a director
> and its operating only in the localnode mode?
>
It is good to have two servers running https daemon.
Then, you can test whether the connections from the same
client will be sent to the same server after the SSL key
is generated and exchanged.
Wensong
>
> Joe
>
> --
> Joseph Mack mack@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
|
