|
Instead of using dummy0 only, I added VIP to tunl0 directly:
RS$ip add VIP dev tunl0
Guess what? It worked!
What's the difference of dummy0 and tunl0? Why didn't it work for dummy0
only?
Here is what I did on the real server:
$insmod ipip
$ifconfig tunl0 up
$ifconfig dummy0 0.0.0.0 up
$echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/hidden
$echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/dummy0/hidden
$ip addr add VIP dev dummy0
This didn't work (see my last email attached below)
Then I added:
$ip addr add VIP dev tunl0
It then worked perfectly.
Question: can I add multiple VIP to tunl0? like:
$ip addr add VIP1 dev tunl0
$ip addr add VIP2 dev tunl0
Thanks,
-Tao
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Tao Zhao wrote:
> I took some time to read the whole thread you gave me. Here is the
> situation (all CIP, VIP and RIP are at the same subnet).
>
> RS$tcpdump -n src host CIP and dst host VIP
> 19:12:52.685309 tunl0 < CIP.32819 > VIP.telnet blah blah...
>
> So client packets got to the tunl0.
>
> RS$tcpdump -n src host VIP and dst host CIP
> nothing happened. Bad.
>
> RS$traceroute -n -s VIP CIP (failed)
> and
> Client$tcpdump -n host VIP
> eth0 < VIP.33838 > CIP.33437: udp ...
> eht0 > CIP > VIP:cimp: CIP udp port 33437 unreachable
>
> RS$ip route get from CIP to VIP iif dummy0
> local VIP from CIP dev lo src VIP cache <local> iif dummy0
>
> It seems that the real server get the ipip packet in tunl0, but somehow
> failed to send out packet back to client. I don't think it's the route
> problem because everything is on the same subnet. Below is the output
> of ip route:
>
> RS$ip route
> x.y.z.128/25 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src RIP
> 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo scope link
> default via GW dev eth0
>
> I'm feeling I'm almost getting it but not yet.
>
> Please help me out,
> -Tao
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
|
