|
here's what i'm thinking i can do:
200.200.200.1 = router
(whatever, some publically-accessable ip range...)
200.200.200.11 = lvs balancer 1.
200.200.200.12 = lvs balancer 2.
route 192.168.100.0/255.255.255.0 added to both balancers (not sure if this is
even necessary)
192.168.100.101 = real server 1.
192.168.100.102 = real server 2.
route 200.200.200.0/255.255.255.0 added to both real servers.
gateway on real servers = 200.200.200.1
2 balancers that fail over via heartbeat/ultramonkey.
i'd like to do balancing on port 80 with the direct routing method. i'll
probably use ipchains on the real servers to solve the arp problem as i'll
probably be redirecting port 80 to some non-priviledged port on the real
server anyway (8080, whatever). the machines listed above will not be
physically segmented--they'll all be on the same vlan of a foundry
workgroup network switch.
will this work? if they're on the same physical segment like this then
the balancers should be able to redirect traffic properly via direct
routing, and the real servers can then send back out to the real world
with that 200.200.200.0 route through the .1 gateway.
am i correct or am i missing something here?
sorry, it's been a while since i've done much with lvs, so i just wanted a
quick confirmation. thanks!
-tcl.
|
