Re: Re: Re: LVS Director as default gw?

To: Aihua Liu <liuah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: LVS Director as default gw?
Cc: "lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:07:45 +0300 (EEST)

On Thu, 22 May 2003, Aihua Liu wrote:

> >     That will need allocating unique TCP/UDP port in the
> >director for each conn to the real servers.
>     Can you tell me why? Currently LVS-NAT mode don't need allocate unique
> TCP/UDP port in the director for each conn.

        Currently, CIP:CPORT is preserved and it is unique.
If director ( creates connections to real server then you can create 65k conns. Can the number of
original conns (before director) fit in this space considering
time wait sockets, etc?

if>VIP:80 and>VIP:80 are both mapped to
same> what happens? The server's
TCP stack is confused.

> I want to implement this for multi-directors loadbalancing.

        I don't know what exactly is your setup but that can happen
for example in this way:

requests come from ISP1 to VIP1 and are served from LB1

requests come from ISP2 to VIP2 and are served from LB2

the real servers have source routes (LVS-DR):
from VIP1 to universe via LB1 or GW1
from VIP2 to universe via LB2 or GW2

with LVS-DR you can route the in->out traffic via any router you
want, even through LBx.


Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>

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