Re: LVS-DR where Directors are also Realservers

[Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>]

        Hello,

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Horms wrote:

> > Can I put this in the HOWTO as a generalised way of accepting packets
> > on the director when using fwmark with LVS.
>
> I was wondering that on the way home last night. I would suspect so.
> It has the potential to cover a lot of issues in a manner
> that is supported by stock kernels. That would be nice.
> But then again those issues may disappear if LVS was moved
> to prerouting.

        Yes, if we move IPVS to pre_routing we will not need local
delivery routes. We will work strctly with the virtual server
definition: match fwmark or VIP. We will be able to balance any
forwarded traffic.

Regards

--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>