Re: Web vs Mail services

To: lvs-users <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Web vs Mail services
From: "isplist@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <isplist@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 22:18:27 -0500
>> ]# ipvsadm -L -n
>> IP Virtual Server version 1.2.0 (size=4096)
>> Prot LocalAddress:Port Scheduler Flags
>> -> RemoteAddress:Port           Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn
>> TCP wlc
>> TCP wlc
>> TCP wlc
>> ->             Route   1      0          0
>> ->             Route   1      0          0
>> TCP wlc

>> Actually, that is very interesting. It shows exactly what's happening.
>> Only port 80 traffic has been able to get through, none of the others.
> In that case, is http working ?

Yes, so are all of the other services. If I connect directly to the mail
servers, all services are running. If I connect through LVS, only http makes
it, everything else fails.

> There are no real servers assigned to the other virtual services.
> You are using keepalived, right? I guess its health checker thinks
> that the real servers for the non-http virtual services are unavailable.
> Perhaps because they aren't responding as keepalived expects.

Keepalived, no, I've always thought that was part of another project. I'm only
using LVS/pulse. The other LVS servers work fine for web services.


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