LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

RE: problem getting vrrp to work in very simple setup

To: "Alexandre Cassen" <Alexandre.Cassen@xxxxxxxxxx>, <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: problem getting vrrp to work in very simple setup
Cc: keepalived-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Neulinger, Nathan" <nneul@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:20:15 -0600
Interesting, cause that's what I thought. Unfortunately, what I see is
that even though the ipvs syncd threads are running, no data is ever
transmitted from the machine. I've tried messing with syncd_threshold to
no effect. I would assume that shortly after I establish a session, I
should see the counts updated on the standby director? I never see any
change in ipvsadm output on the standby. 

The vrrp and lvs failover works fine with 1.1.4, just not syncd for
existing connections. 

For keepalive, the only changes I see that could be relevant are the
changes for the timer. With your replacements, it looks to be updated
much less frequently, but I'm not sure why that would cause an issue. I
don't see how the linkbeat change could be relevant.

-- Nathan

------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Neulinger                       EMail:  nneul@xxxxxxx
University of Missouri - Rolla         Phone: (573) 341-6679
UMR Information Technology             Fax: (573) 341-4216
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexandre Cassen [mailto:Alexandre.Cassen@xxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 3:48 PM
> To: Neulinger, Nathan; LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list.
> Cc: keepalived-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: problem getting vrrp to work in very simple setup
> 
> Hi Nathan,
> 
> >What is necessary to get LVS syncd functionality to work? 
> Does your syncd 
> >patch need to be applied or will it work without it?
> >
> >Setting the lvs syncd interface seems to get ka to start the 
> ipvs syncd 
> >thread in the kernel, but I don't ever see any traffic sent over the 
> >network that would indicate it's trying to keep the other 
> director up to date.
> >
> >If your syncd patch does need applied, is there a clean way 
> of getting it 
> >into 2.4.24, since it already has ipvs included?
> 
> On 2.4 kernel you need the patch if you want to support syncd for 
> active/active conf. Keepalived only send sockopt to kernel so 
> if IPVS is 
> patched VRRP will be able to drive syncd for active/active.
> 
> I need to refresh this patch for new kernel. Will do, I have 
> currently a 
> devel task on Keepalived to find a bug in 1.1.5 code... Will 
> release syncd 
> patch after.
> 
> Best regards,
> Alexandre 
> 
> 
> 
> 
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>