|
Hi Adrian,
Well I am ready to give up now. (after 2 days) You and Joe gave me the
right answers, but I had to try for myself :-)
Bottom line using Linux and LVS-NAT is that I could not:
Do load balancing and have direct access to a real server with only
modifications done to the LVS box.
*Exceptions*
- Replicating services on the real servers to other ports
- Adding VIPS on the LVS to each real server.
- I may have missed some others .....
I am not trying to open up a debate on whether the current approach we
have with our Cisco LD is a good one or not, I
was only trying to do a simple functional comparison and at the same
time learn a lot more about LVS and Ethernet networking.
I am pushing to replace our Cisco LD with an LVS solution and in doing
so was trying to prove to one of our IT guys that the LVS could mimic
the functionality of our Cisco LD the way we are running it now. It
seems that in this situation it can't, or at least I have not been able
to do it!
(I could have missed something)
No matter how I changed things I could only get one bit of the
functionality working at a time
Client -> real server IP or Client -> LD IP -> real server, not both
Setting up the TARP daemon worked for one request both direct and via LD
but then the server still got the MAC of the true router through the
bridge.
I imagine that I could stop the router from ARP'ing and it would work,
but as mentioned above
I was trying to avoid any changes to systems other then the LVS.
Thanks Adrian and Joe for your patience and help.
Serge out.
--- First post I made on this topic below ---
Serge said -> Has anyone tried doing LVS-NAT with ethernet bridgeing?
Joe said ->
I assume you want the director to be the bridge.
I've sure thought about it a lot as a way of getting packets
between the realservers and the outside world without the director
seeing them. I talked to Horms about it
at OLS and he said that the director still sees all the packets
that are being bridged, so you don't bypass any rules, filter etc.
|
