|
Hello,
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Wensong Zhang wrote:
> The fwmark-based virtual service usually assumes that the port number(s)
> of real services is equal to the port number(s) of virtual service,
> because one fwmark virtual service may group many load balanced services.
... and particulary the persistent fwmark service.
> For example, we can mark dport 22, 80 and 443 as the value 25, then we
> should direct packets to those ports at the real servers respectively, if
> we direct the packets marked with 25 to port 448, there will be problems.
Hm, yes, it seems the both cases are equally useful:
1. To preserve the port (always for DR and TUN), currently implemented.
2. To forward all connections to one RPORT (only for NAT but why
persistent). For example,
FWM 1 www.domain1.com and www.domain2.com -> RIP:80 (httpd)
FWM 2 www.domain3.com and www.domain4.com -> RIP:81 (httpd)
May be better to keep the current variant.
> Since it is out of control of ipvsadm how many ports users specify to mark
> in a single marking-value, we cannot add more checking in ipvsadm program.
> Anyway, I should document this fwmark-based service assumption.
>
> For the above example, the port number of real service is different to
> that of virtual service, it is good to use normal virtual service, like
> ipvsadm -A -t 10.1.2.25:443 -p -s rr
> ipvsadm -a -t 10.1.2.25:443 -r s11-vpn:448 -m
> ipvsadm -a -t 10.1.2.25:443 -r s26-vpn:448 -m
>
> Thanks,
>
> Wensong
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
|
