Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*fwmark\s+based\s+ipvs\s+with\s+state\s+transfer\s+\/\s+failover\:\s+sufficient\s+to\s+mark\s+\-\-syn\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*fwmark\s+based\s+ipvs\s+with\s+state\s+transfer\s+\/\s+failover\:\s+sufficient\s+to\s+mark\s+\-\-syn\?\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Re: fwmark based ipvs with state transfer / failover: sufficient to mark --syn? (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2013 20:10:11 +0200 (EET); Hello, IIRC, fwmark is used by IPVS only for scheduling, it happens only when no existing connection is found. So, it looks safe to mark only SYN packets. Only for FTP we create connection on SYN+ACK; /html/lvs-devel/2013-11/msg00003.html (12,192 bytes)
2. fwmark based ipvs with state transfer / failover: sufficient to mark --syn? (score: 1): Author: Patrick Schaaf <netdev@xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2013 18:16:08 +0100; Dear LVS developers, (sorry if this seems silly - I prefer asking around over getting bitten some time down the road...) we run ipvs in LVS-NAT mode on two loadbalancers in an active/standby setup, w; /html/lvs-devel/2013-11/msg00002.html (9,159 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]