|
At 11:50 PM 1/10/2001 +0000, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> Hello,
>
>On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Florin Andrei wrote:
>
>> --- Wensong Zhang <wensong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > Status: we will try to keep the IPVS Netfilter module version 0.1.2 or
>> > later for kernel 2.4 ready for production. New stuff will go to version
>> > 0.2.x.
>>
>> Now, is 0.1.2 REALLY ready for production? Can you bet your life on it?
>> (because i will bet my career if i'll use it instead of the 2.2 version)
>
> Wow, I don't know many people in production with kernel 2.4 :)
Julian is right. So far, no one has officially support
2.4 kernel, not even Red Hat.
>We don't know for bugs in LVS for 2.4 but may be you need an opinion
>from other happy people in production. You can notice one difference
>between LVS for 2.2 and 2.4: the NAT setup is tricky to build if you
>rely on netfilter's new connection tracking using iptables. The LVS/DR
>and LVS/TUN methods and the other functionalities are working in the same
>way. The other difference is that in 2.4 LVS can serve FTP without any
>help from other modules, even for LVS/NAT. In 2.2 you need ip_masq_ftp.
>
> The users with more CPUs and NICs can build now more powerful
>boxes, thanks to the new 2.4 networking.
>
> But don't ignore your tests. It is always risky to jump to
>something new. Someone can be happy but may be the new LVS can't work
>for your setup. It is up to you to make your transition plan safe :)
>For me, the 2.2 kernel is good enough for LVS box and I don't need to
>change it to 2.4. I prefer to burn some real servers than to kill
>my lovely LVS box :)
>
>
>Regards
>
>--
>Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>or go to http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
|
