|
On Tue, Jun 13, 2000 at 12:29:24PM -0600, Ryan Hulsker wrote:
>
> Just 3 questions...
>
> Basically all of these systems are running RH6.2 with the latest
> fixes from RH (as of 2 weeks ago, LVS 0.9.7 ) and I am wondering if any of
> the functionality I need is provided in the latest versions of LVS with the
> newer kernel.. Is it worth it to me to upgrade my LVS boxes, and re certify
> the system when I have to go live at the end of the month? Or do I need to
> go with a NAT configuration?
>
> 1. Is it possible to use DR without having to have each webserver
> use a uniqe real IP address. Basically I have a DMZ with a limeted number
> of IP addresses and I will need most of them for VIPs.
Technically yes, though the Real servers will not be able to intiate
connections to the outside world if they are sitting on RFC 1918 addresses.
But they should be able to reply to LVSed traffic as the source
address apply will be set to the VIP.
> 2. I have noticed with my setup that LVS does not handle classless
> IPs well. when lvs starts up the VIP the mask is always /24 or /16. My
> range of real IPs is only a /27. Is this my error, a known issue, or
> somthing that has been fixed?
I am a little confused, netmask? 0.9.7 only supports a single
VIP per virtual server, that is netmask 255.255.255.255.
Certainly if you move to 0.9.10 or greater then you can use
the fmwark support which will allow you to assign CIDR networks
for a virtaul service.
Can you be a little more clear on where this classful netmask
is occuring, certainly 0.9.7 should be able to run a single
VIP on a /27. I have a /28 at home and have used it for testing :)
> 3. I have been trying to set LVS up so that I have multiple VIPs,
> and can simply add or remove any RS from any VS. And I would also like to
> have any RS be a part of multiple VSs. The only way I could get this to
> work in my test environment was to use multiple bogus IPs on the RSs so that
> two VS definitions could point at the same RS using different IPs. I found
> that if the same RS IP was in two different VS configs one would be
> overridden and the RS would only participate in one VS.
I believe that the fwmark support is what you are looking for here.
You should take a look at http://ultramonkey.sourceforge.net/ which
outlines several topologies using multiple VIPs with the same RS.
In the documention this is refered to a network of virtual services
as one contiguous network is used for the VIPs, though multiple
networks could be used too.
--
Horms
|
