LVS
lvs-devel
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: [patch][bug][ldirectord] a fallback server specified in a virtual se

To: lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [patch][bug][ldirectord] a fallback server specified in a virtual server section without a port
From: Sohgo Takeuchi <sohgo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:51:25 +0900 (JST)

From: Sohgo Takeuchi <sohgo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|
> I found a bug in ldirectord and attach a patch to fix this
> problem to this E-mail.
> 
> The bug is that if a port is omitted in a "fallback" in a
> virtual section, the entry is never seen in the virtual server
> table even if all real servers are down.
> 
>     virtual=10.10.100.1:daytime
>       real=10.10.100.2:daytime gate
>       fallback=127.0.0.1
> 
> A debug message says like this.
> 
>     DEBUG2: Running system(/sbin/ipvsadm -a -t 10.10.100.1:13 -r 127.0.0.1: 
> -g -w 1)
>     Running system(/sbin/ipvsadm -a -t 10.10.100.1:13 -r 127.0.0.1: -g -w 1)
>     illegal real server address[:port] specified
>     DEBUG2: system(/sbin/ipvsadm -a -t 10.10.100.1:13 -r 127.0.0.1: -g -w 1) 
> failed:
>     system(/sbin/ipvsadm -a -t 10.10.100.1:13 -r 127.0.0.1: -g -w 1) failed:
> 
> 
> The problem in the source code is that when a port of "fallback"
> is omitted, the port is derived from a port specified in a
> "virtual" service (from a behavior of the parse_fallback
> function), but the port is used before it is defined.
> 
> I tested ldirectord on Ubuntu 10.04 with perl 5.10.1.
> 
> with best regards,

Does anyone have an interest in this bug?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

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