|
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 12:09:30PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> 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.
That makes much more sense don't you think?
After all LVS is really much closer to being
a router than a host.
--
Horms
|
