|
At 09:43 PM 11/1/2001 +0000, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> Hello,
>
>On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Wayne wrote:
>
>> According to the 2.2.19 kernel version of
>> "net/ip_masq.h" (which the LVS patch ipvs-1.0.8
>> does not change),
>>
>> /*
>> * Linux ports don't normally get allocated above 32K.
>> * I used an extra 4K port-space
>> */
>> #define PORT_MASQ_BEGIN 61000
>> #define PORT_MASQ_END (PORT_MASQ_BEGIN+4096)
>> The comment seems to imply that I could widen or
>> move the range [PORT_MASQ_BEGIN, PORT_MASQ_END] as
>> long as it starts above 32 k and ends below 64 k.
>
> Yes. Even 2.4 sometimes selects 32768..61000
Thanks. What about using large than 32k range?
What would be the maximum range I could select?
Are they different between 2.2 and 2.4?
>> Do you foresee any problems making this range bigger
>> or perhaps moving it to another location above 32 k?
>>
>> Also the constant "PORT_MASQ_MUL" from
>> "net/ipv4/ip_masq.c" appears to serve only as
>> a check to make sure that the masquerading facility
>> does not hog all the available memory, and that
>> actually things would still work no matter how large
>> it is or even if the checks using it are disabled
>> altogether. Is this statement true?
>
> We discussed this issue May-2000. It is in the HOWTO. By
>multiplying this constant with the masq port range size you define
>the connection limit for each protocol. Yes, this is
>related to the used memory for masquerading and this is
>a real limit but not for the LVS connections because they
>are usually not limited by port collisions and LVS does not
>check this limit.
>
>> Thanks.
>
>Regards
>
>--
>Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Thanks, Julian!
>_______________________________________________
>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
|
