Re: I'm having a problem

To: jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: I'm having a problem
Cc: Wensong Zhang <wensong@xxxxxxxxx>, LVS Mailinglist <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Wensong Zhang <wensong@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 00:14:21 +0800

jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> It seems to be some funky arp related thing cause like I said, if I
> disable the machine that it decides to go to, then balancing begins
> to work, as soon as I bring it back up, lvs will only go to that
> machine.
> Same rules, except using the NAT method works fine.
> Please tell me how to give you more information and I will.
> The NAT method works fine for my requirements, but I'm still curious about
> the weird behavior with Direct Routing.

I guess that you are running Linux 2.2.xx for the real server, its
ARP device does the ARP response, which will make the LVS/DR not
work. Because in the LVS/DR, the VIP is shared by the load balancer
and the real servers, only the load balancer does the ARP response
for the VIP to accept the incoming request packets, the real servers
don't do ARP response but they can process packets destined for
VIP directly.

To avoid the arp problem of Linux 2.2.xx, please try to configure
the VIP on the dummy network device instead of the loopback alias


---------------------------------------------------------------------- mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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