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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[lvs\-users\]\s+lvs\.\s+Nat\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: net.study.sea@xxxxxxxxx; Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 08:00:23 +0800; No , it is not Broadcomm nic 2014-5-121:02daryl herzmann <akrherz@xxxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at: http:/; /html/lvs-users/2014-05/msg00002.html (21,912 bytes)
2. Re: [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: daryl herzmann <akrherz@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 08:02:48 -0500 (CDT); Hello, Are you using a broadcomm NIC? Perhaps you are hitting the issue with GRO enabled causing brutal performance. If so, you could try disabling GRO and see if things are speedy. ethtool -K eth0 g; /html/lvs-users/2014-05/msg00001.html (17,787 bytes)
3. Re: [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: net.study.sea@xxxxxxxxx; Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 07:56:35 +0800; Thanks for reply! I have configured the reply going through director ,but the reply is very slowly. 2014-4-3022:36Anders Henke <anders.henke@xxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________; /html/lvs-users/2014-05/msg00000.html (17,612 bytes)
4. Re: [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: Anders Henke <anders.henke@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:36:05 +0200; If you're balancing only a single tcp port, the director will reply to any other tcp ports and protocols. So "ping" (icmp) will be answered from the director with the correct IP address, and the atte; /html/lvs-users/2014-04/msg00026.html (17,329 bytes)
5. Re: [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: net.study.sea@xxxxxxxxx; Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 21:47:30 +0800; 2014-4-3019:56Anders Henke <anders.henke@xxxxxxxx> At this time,if C could reply directly to A ,not through director ,then what is the result? After I configure well Lvs in NAT mode, I find it deal w; /html/lvs-users/2014-04/msg00025.html (14,294 bytes)
6. Re: [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: Anders Henke <anders.henke@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 13:56:21 +0200; There are multiple issues with this. -IP-address changes -possible port changes The client initiates a connection from Client-IP A to Director-VIP B: The director rewrites the IP packet as if it had; /html/lvs-users/2014-04/msg00024.html (12,751 bytes)
7. Re: [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: net.study.sea@xxxxxxxxx; Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 07:52:06 +0800; The real server received packet's source ip is client ip , why not it reply directly to client if there is router available route? 2014-4-2922:43Anders Henke <anders.henke@xxxxxxxx> _________________; /html/lvs-users/2014-04/msg00023.html (10,551 bytes)
8. Re: [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: Anders Henke <anders.henke@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:43:19 +0200; In NAT mode, the director does perform destination nat on request packets, so your realserver does still see the correct "source" ip address. However, replies then need to be sent via the director as; /html/lvs-users/2014-04/msg00022.html (9,087 bytes)
9. [lvs-users] lvs. Nat (score: 1): Author: net.study.sea@xxxxxxxxx; Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 22:19:57 +0800; In nat mode,does director do dnat and snat packets for all request packets? _______________________________________________ Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at: http://ww; /html/lvs-users/2014-04/msg00021.html (8,561 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]