|
Hi, I have been setting up a test network to benchmark IPVS,
the topology is as follows.
node-1 node-6 node-7
(client) (client) (client)
| | | client-net
---------+---------+----------+------ 192.168.2.0/24
|
node-3 (router)
| server-net
------+--------+----------+--- 192.168.1.0/24
| | |
node-2 node-4 node-5
(IPVS) (server) (server)
The 192.168.2.0/24 and 192.168.1.0/24 are gigabit networks. The
performance is limited to about 185Mbits/s/node as I am using
ee1000 cards, which have performance issues. This was measured
using netpipe-2.3. I am looking at getting some better/faster
cards to this may not happen for a couple of weeks. The good
thing is that at these bit rates there was no appreciable
difference in network performance when using IPVS to multiplex,
as opposed to directly accessing one of the servers.
The question that I have is that the network I would really like
to be testing is;
node-1 node-6 node-7
(client) (client) (client)
| | | client-net
---------+---------+----------+------ 192.168.2.0/24
|
node-2 (IPVS)
| server-net
---------+-----+----+--------- 192.168.1.0/24
| |
node-4 node-5
(server) (server)
This may be a silly question, but other than using NAT, which has
performance problems, is this possible. I tried this topology
with direct routing and packets from the clients were multiplexed
to the servers fine, but return packets from the servers to the
client were not routed by the IPVS box.
This is not a problem as such as it probably makes a lot of sense
on not to use an IPVS box as your gateway router, but I am
curious to know if I have missed something.
--
Horms
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
