|
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> In fact, the documentation is incorrect. There is no difference,
> all devices are reported in the ARP replies: lo, tunl and dummy. So, only
it's been quite a while since I first did this so I can't remember what
tests I did, but the LVS did work with a dummy0 or a tunl0 interface
on an unpatched 2.2.x kernel. I will go check everything again, but
it will be a while before I will get around to it
Joe
> the ARP patch can solve the problem. This can be tested using this
> configuration with any device (before the patch applied):
>
> Host A:
> eth:x 192.168.0.1
>
> Host B:
> eth:x 192.168.0.2
> lo, dummy, tunl: 192.168.0.3
>
>
> On host A try: ping 192.168.0.3
>
> Host B replies for 192.168.0.3 through 192.168.0.2 device
>
> So, the ARP problem means: "All local interfaces are reported"
> until the ARP patch is used. In fact, all ARP patches which use IFF_NOARP
> to hide the interface are incorrect. I don't expect them in the kernel.
>
> Regards,
>
> Julian Anastasov
>
> On Thu, 18 Nov 1999, Joseph Mack wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, Nick Christopher wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > 60 pages ... more of a novel then a HOWTO!
> > >
> > > Okay so I am confused on the ARP problem....
> > >
> > > My setup:
> > > All machines, director and realservers have 2.2.13 kernels.
> > > I am using VS-TUN on the director.
> > > All machines on the same segment.
> > > All machines have a single NIC.
> > >
> > > My question:
> > > How, *concisely*, do I *most simply* avoid the ARP problem?
> >
> > from where you are
> >
> > 1. guaranteed to work
> >
> > put the arp patch on the realservers and recompile the kernel
> >
> >
> > 2. possibly works (it either does or doesn't and I didn't write the result
> > down)
> >
> > use the dummy0 device instead of the tunl0 device on the realservers
> >
> >
> > >
> > > My Observations to date:
> > > BH (Before HOWTO) I had ipvs patched kernels on the realservers and was
> > > using device tunl0 (which ifconfig said was NOARP) and that seemed to
> > > work. And the arp -a said the right thing but....
> > >
> > > AH (After HOWTO) I tried device dummy0 rather than tunl0 on same boxes
> > > and everything again seemed to work.
> > >
> > > AH I tried device dummy0 on a 2.2.13 box without the ipvs patch and it
> > > just plain didn't answer...though I'm not sure ip tunneling is on in
> > > that kernel.
> >
> > you need to check that tunneling is on first
> >
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
--
Joseph Mack mack@xxxxxxxxxxx
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
