|
(still on exchange web mail)..
If you want an answer back "directly", then you will use LVS-DR and have
public IPs on your real servers. Is there a reason you want this feature,
ie worried about performance?
Peter
PS - if you must use private IPs on the real servers then you should use
LVS-NAT.
-----Original Message-----
From: djo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: ''lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' '
Sent: 6/17/2002 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: Question about LVS-DR setup
# | |
# | client |
# |________|
# |
# |
# | __________
# | | |
# |------| director |
# | |__________|
# |
# |
# |
# |
# -------------------
# | |
# | |
# ______________ ______________
# | | | |
# | realserver1 | | realserver2 |
# |______________| |______________|
This is what I want to do: client on Internet connects to director via
eth1.
Whether there is a router/firewall between them at this point is
optional,
at this point I will just assume not.
Director receives packet and round-robins it do one of the realservers.
The realservers answer back to the client directly (*not* back through
the
director.
Here are the relevant numbers:
Live IP available: 66.111.111.116
IP address of director, eth0: 192.168.1.241
IP address of realserver1, eth0: 192.168.1.22
IP address of realserver2, eth0: 192.168.1.22
Default gateway (3Com Router on our network) for 192.168.1.0/255 subnet:
192.168.1.254
_______________________________________________
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
|
