Re: [lvs-users] localnode question

To: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [lvs-users] localnode question
Cc: " users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
From: Dean Scothern <dean.scothern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 14:55:37 +0000
Thanks for your update.

I've tried to apply these to a vanilla kernel and I'm getting a lot of 
rejects (a few successes).
What kernel do these patches apply to please?

Best Regards

On 08 December 2011 09:42 Simon Horman Wrote:

>I believe that the patch you are after is "ipvs: changes for local real 
>Looking over the logs, you may also want to consider the following
>subsequent patches:
>* ipvs: changes for local client
>* ipvs: restore support for iptables SNAT
>> I'm trying to get the behaviour working on a rhel/centos 6 kernel which is
>based on 2.6.32.
>> To my unpractised eye the differences between ipvs  on vanilla and
> do not seem too great. It seems involved on adding SCTP support.
>> I'm hoping (probably futile) that I might be able to use the files in the url
>above with little or no alteration.
>> Is that a vain hope?
>There do seem to be some more changes, but nothing that seems particularly
>> Also to clarify, the new behaviour is that for ipvs nat to a IP on the
>> node, the application needs to listen on the RIP and not the VIP?
>If you use the MASQ forwarding mechanism and the RIP is a local IP address
>on the director, then it will be handled locally.
>In this case the RIP and the VIP may be the same address.

Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at: mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
or go to

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