|
Hello,
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, James Treleaven wrote:
> Now I understand what *should* occur. I have set up an LVS-NAT with NAT
> rules which should allow me to ping machines on the external network ... but
> I cannot. My traceroute ends at my director. My 'iptables' rules (below)
> look right to me. Hmmm.
This is bad
> I'll be honest - I am using piranha with RedHat's ipvs in the kernel. But I
> *really* want a generic understanding of how to debug LVS ... and if I
> understand what Julian has said - my problems have nothing to do with ipvs.
> My 'iptables' NAT setup should allow me to ping the outside network
> regardless of whether or not I have LVS running. But it doesn't, thus it
Right, you have to run NAT first because it means the routing
is correct
> must be wrong (or my routing tables are). But they both sure look OK to me.
>
> Here are my 'iptables' rules. I have more details (including tcpdump output)
> below.
>
> Thanks in advance for any help,
> James
> CIP = 216.26.108.94
> VIP = 216.26.108.118 (eth0:1)
> DIP = 192.168.2.102 (eth1:1)
> RIP1 = 192.168.2.9
> RGW = 192.168.2.102 (GIP for all realserver)
I understand what is your goal, this is a generic NAT setup.
> (b) Results for tcpdump when I perform this ping from the realserver:
> 'ping -c2 216.26.108.94':
>
> [root@lvs00 root]# tcpdump -ln -i eth0 host 216.26.108.94
> tcpdump: listening on eth0
> 19:14:50.335795 arp who-has 216.26.108.94 tell 192.168.2.9
> 19:14:51.333363 arp who-has 216.26.108.94 tell 192.168.2.9
> 19:14:52.333191 arp who-has 216.26.108.94 tell 192.168.2.9
This is very strange, it shows broken routing at the
real server. Why RS resolves client's lladdr by using ARP?
> (d) Director's Routing Table
routes in director look good
> (e) Real Server's Routing Table
> [root@rs50 root]# route -n
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
> Iface
Hm, this is bad, at least, if I understand correctly the
output but you can prove it by showing output from "ip route":
> 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.102 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
> 192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
> 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
> 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
It seems you have route to 0.0.0.0/24 via 192.168.1.102.
It should be 0.0.0.0/0. Is this true or may be I don't understand this
output.
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
|
