Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[lvs\-users\]\s+about\s+NAT\s+return\s+path\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[lvs\-users\]\s+about\s+NAT\s+return\s+path\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: support@xxxxxxxxxx; Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 10:01:07 +0100; Hello Yonghua Peng, AS per LVS-NAT concept the realservers are allmost at an second network( rfc1912 ipaddresses allmost ): haveing i.e net 1.2.3.4 on lb1 at eth0 haveing i.e net 192.168.1.1 on lb1 a; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00037.html (13,708 bytes)
2. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Martin Wheldon <martin.wheldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:51:55 +0000; Hi, I would expect that to work yes. Best Regards Martin _______________________________________________ Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at: http://www.linuxvirtualserve; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00012.html (11,505 bytes)
3. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Yonghua Peng <yhpeng@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 18:42:04 +0800; Hi, So, since LVS (NAT mode) implement SNAT for the returned packages, and all LVS hosts have the same VIP, and all LVS hosts have been configured with the same rules, now for the realserver, it can; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00011.html (10,358 bytes)
4. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Martin Wheldon <martin.wheldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:31:30 +0000; Hi, The SNAT could be configured on either the LVS node or the real server. Best Regards Martin _______________________________________________ Please read the documentation before posting - it's ava; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00010.html (19,543 bytes)
5. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Yonghua Peng <yhpeng@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 18:29:23 +0800; SNAT on the real server? sorry but I was thinking the SNAT is implemented by LVS, for the returned back packages. _______________________________________________ Please read the documentation before; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00009.html (17,835 bytes)
6. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Martin Wheldon <martin.wheldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:22:43 +0000; Hi, Yes, with the SNAT on the real server you should be fine. Best Regards Martin _______________________________________________ Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at: htt; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00008.html (16,602 bytes)
7. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Yonghua Peng <yhpeng@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 18:12:57 +0800; Martin, What I meant is, the incoming packages implement DNAT by LVS, then forward to realserver. The outgoing packages implement SNAT, then forward to client. Since host A and B have the same VIP (m; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00007.html (15,018 bytes)
8. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Martin Wheldon <martin.wheldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:02:14 +0000; Hi, The DNAT would still need to be reversed. The client will otherwise drop the packet as it won't be from the host it started the connection with. Best Regards Martin ______________________________; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00006.html (13,753 bytes)
9. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Yonghua Peng <yhpeng@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 17:59:51 +0800; If it's just a DNAT forwarding for the incoming packet, I don't think LVS host has to keep the status of the connection. I am probably wrong, just by curious. And I will test for it. Thanks. ________; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00005.html (12,389 bytes)
10. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Martin Wheldon <martin.wheldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 09:43:59 +0000; Hi, Because there will be no entry in the NAT table on the second host so it won't know how to deal with the return packet. Best Regards Martin _______________________________________________ Please; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00004.html (10,179 bytes)
11. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Yonghua Peng <yhpeng@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 17:06:20 +0800; Can you tell me why the realserver should use host A as the gateway? since host A and B have the same configure, and share the same VIP, I was thinking both A and B can be setup as the gateway. Thank; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00003.html (9,453 bytes)
12. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Ivan Havlicek <ivan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 09:59:45 +0100; Hi, No, if a transaction start via LVS host A, the realserver need to use this host as gateway to respond. This is the normal for a NAT. To make it work, you can use some SNAT rules on each LVS host; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00002.html (10,606 bytes)
13. Re: [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Yonghua Peng <yhpeng@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:47:37 +0800; Sorry for the less info. I meant, all the LVS hosts have the same VIP (managed by OSPF). And their configure are exactly the same. _______________________________________________ Please read the docu; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00001.html (8,607 bytes)
14. [lvs-users] about NAT return path (score: 1): Author: Yonghua Peng <yhpeng@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:33:47 +0800; Hello, We have a group of hosts for LVS NAT, they are exactly with the same configure. My question is, when the incoming package is from LVS host A to realserver, but the returned package is going th; /html/lvs-users/2015-02/msg00000.html (8,341 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]