|
We use DR and just for information sake, a PIII 700 with 512 MB RAM holds
the bandwidth of about 75 Mbits sustained with little trouble. Average
workload is about 0.27 all day. Hope that helps.
Ramon Kagan
York University, Computing and Network Services
Unix Team - Intermediate System Administrator
(416)736-2100 #20263
rkagan@xxxxxxxx
-------------------------------------
I have not failed. I have just
found 10,000 ways that don't work.
- Thomas Edison
-------------------------------------
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, vecna@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Ciao Vecna,
> > I'm especially honoured to see you on this mailinglist. I love BFi and I
> > will personally make sure you get premium support while setting up LVS.
> tnx :) in few time we must release some news :)
>
> > LVS-NAT or LVS-DR mode?
> LVS-DR
>
> > Are those 2 GB NICs planned for redundant Internet access?
> is a separated vlan, not for backuo line, we need behind the LVS
> 10-12 RS to work as IDS.
>
> I'm thinking only to divide the traffic between the IDSs, with a
> session tracking of LVS I think this could work fine ...
>
> "Matthew S. Crocker" <matthew@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Personally I would go with a machine using two Gig Ethernets. Plug one
> > into a switch to break out the 100 mb connetions to the real servers.
> I think to use 10/12 cross wire for connect the IDSs directly
>
> > I would think it would be more memory bandwidth limited than
> > actual CPU power.
> maybe :) and LVS-DR don't required a lots of memory how could required
> LVS-NAT ... but what's about network device ? we are thinking to
> but three quad intel for contact the RS and two 3Com 35985 for external
> interface, did you know if those work correctly ?
>
> bye :)
> vecna
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
|
