LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: NAT cluster....

To: <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Stephen Rowles" <spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: NAT cluster....
From: "Ted Pavlic" <tpavlic@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 13:40:27 -0400
> After trying to use Direct Routing on an ATM network I discovered that
> because of the ATM it is not possible to have duplicate MAC addresses for
a
> single IP. The cluster will be a telnet / compute cluster which will load
> balance telnet, ftp, and SSH traffic.

Hm. That's interesting.

Now are you saying that the ATM doesn't like:

* the director ARPing for those addresses and the real servers sending
responses for them
-- If this is the case, rather than having your director ARP for the
addresses, ROUTE the addresses directly to the director.

* packets destined for each VIP heading toward different real servers at
different times
* packets from the same VIPs coming from different real servers
-- If one of these are the case, have you tried LVS-TUN?

You should be able to implement LVS-TUN similarly to how one would implement
LVS-DR. That is, the actual network topology won't be that different...
However -- becasue it lives much much higher up than your ATM network, I
imagine you won't have the same MAC address problems.

Take a look at:

http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/VS-IPTunneling.html

It should still perform better than VS-NAT.

> To solve the problem I am proposing the following setup:
>
...
> So... Each Real-Server will have both access to a private network for
> cluster communications, and the public network for file-server / admin
> communications. BUT all traffic for the cluster VIP must travel via the
> director to ensure that there is only one machine communicating via the
VIP.
> I know this will probably create all sorts of routing problems but this is
> the only solution that I can think of.

I see no problems with the configuration you propose using VS-NAT, and I
think you'll find the routing won't be too difficult, (that is -- it won't
be anything special. It'll be as exotic as anyone else who has had to put
multiple network cards in one machine before and use all of them
simultaneously) BUT I really think that you might be able to stick with
VS-DR or even slightly change to VS-TUN (if your real servers support it, of
course) and be just as happy if not happier and not have to worry about any
of the multiple NIC complications.

Best of luck.

All the best --
Ted



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>