Re: topologies

To: " users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: topologies
From: Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 15:21:52 -0700 (PDT)
On Sat, 26 May 2007, Gerry Reno wrote:

Are there any preferred topologies for setting up LVS?
Right now without LVS I have everything on one lan and I just run firewalls. But to use LVS effectively I can see I need to create separate lans.


Now this presents other problems because if I put my sets of realservers (web, db) on separate lans

separate from what, the other realservers? the VIP?

then it's more difficult to administer them and also they will lose access to common resources such as the backup server. So it looks like each realserver will have to be part of multiple lans or vlans into order to still have access to common resouces. In doing so, will it create any problems with routing for the VIP's and GW's?

such as?

I don't want any triangulation problems that can cause connections to hang.

what's a triangulation problem?

You haven't mentioned any of the problems you're worrying about, so I can't help you much at the moment.

There's only two topologies at least as I think about it.

o all machines on one physical network

o all machines on two physical networks (the director has two NICs)

either way you have to protect the realservers and director and either way I can't see any problems accessing resources (such as network storage).


Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina
jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map
generator at
Homepage It's GNU/Linux!

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