LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re:

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re:
From: Neil Prockter <prockter@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:11:23 +0100
I only mention cisco as it makes me think it works in general,

Neil Prockter wrote:
yep I do this with lvs and with cisco css units

Joseph Mack wrote:

Neil Prockter wrote:

p.s.

you don't HAVE to have the nat set as the default gw you can avoid it if
you wish buy setting up

echo 80 lvs >> /etc/iproute2/rt_tables
ip route add default <lvs gw address> table lvs
ip rule add from <RIP address as known by lvs> table lvs

this says any traffic from the address the lvs woudl send to goes back
that way



so you're saying that the although the return traffic has to go through
the director, the director doesn't have to be the default gw for the realservers?

Sounds reasonable. You've checked it?

All the documentation for LVS-NAT was written years ago and I've not looked
at this part of it again.

Joe


real server interface on the director, that will guarantee all traffic will come back through the director. By default, the path to the clients on the
real servers would not be through the director but it needs to be, so
SNAT'ing would allow/force that.
randy



I'm not sure why you're doing this, when there is a method in place for handling it already. Are you asking a question or telling us you have something working that
we ought to know about?

Joe

_______________________________________________
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
or go to http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [no subject], randy hoffman
    • Re:, Joseph Mack
      • Re:, randy hoffman
        • Re:, Neil Prockter
        • Re:, Joseph Mack
        • Re:, Neil Prockter
        • Re:, Neil Prockter <=