lvs-users
|
|
lvs-users
|
| To: | Jeffrey A Schoolcraft <jschoolc@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: ip tunnelling to lvs clusters doing direct routing with VIP?(clarification) |
| Cc: | lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| From: | Joseph Mack <mack.joseph@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:37:28 -0400 |
Jeffrey A Schoolcraft wrote: > So my thoughts are that if I set up the head node LVS to do tunnelling, and > had the "real servers" be the VIP address of the node lvs' then I should > pretty much have it. Is this correct or am I totally off base? people have talked about using multiple layers of LVS before and there seems to be no reason against it. No-one has done it though. Joe -- Joseph Mack PhD, Senior Systems Engineer, Lockheed Martin contractor to the National Environmental Supercomputer Center, mailto:mack.joseph@xxxxxxx ph# 919-541-0007, RTP, NC, USA |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Direct Routing sucking up System Resources?, Joseph Mack |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Direct Routing sucking up System Resources?, Jeffrey A Schoolcraft |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: ip tunnelling to lvs clusters doing direct routing with VIP? (clarification), Jeffrey A Schoolcraft |
| Next by Thread: | Direct Routing sucking up System Resources?, Jeffrey A Schoolcraft |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |