> > the usual way that LVS is used with pacemaker is that you have a HA pair
> > of LVS laod balancer boxes that load balance across a farm of additional
> > servers, but the LVS boxes themselves are active/bassive
> Thanks, I will take a look.
> No. CLUSTERIP only works on the INPUT chain, not on the forward chain.
> > Believe me that you do not want to setup an active/active firewall, but
> > an active/passive cluster.
> What do you mean? Could you be more specific?
> OK to not user CLUSTERIP. But what about an active/active cluster for
> firewalling? Is there any problem?
Yes. How can you distribute traffic over both systems? The only idea I have are
FWMARKs and loadbalancing according to the MARKs. But is too much effort for a
My advise: Do an active/passive cluster setup WITHOUT loadbalancing. You can
configure state table sync. Every normal hardware today is able to firewall
1Gbit/s traffic. No need to add load balancing.
Dr. Michael Schwartzkopff
Tel: (0163) 172 50 98
Fax: (089) 620 304 13
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users