|
Hello,
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Joseph Mack wrote:
> Julian Anastasov wrote:
> >
> > Keeping ipvsadm and
> > IPVS in sync is one of the main things to consider when upgrading.
>
> This is a bit of a problem. We can't expect users to get everything
> right every time. It would be nice if ipvsadm knew about
> the versions of ip_vs it can work on. I talked to Horms about this
> after the big change at 2.2.12 (2.2.14?), when he said that he didn't
> want to make any more changes until the next big change was forced onto us.
>
> However each version of ipvsadm could have a list of ip_vs versions
> it knew about, a list of old ones that are incompatible, and for future
> versions of ip_vs (that didn't exist when that version of ipvsadm
> was written), it could return
Currently, ipvsadm knows about the min IPVS version to work with.
IMO, what is missing is the kernel to require identification from ipvsadm,
for example, incremental ipvsadm release ID. Change in the ID means
incompatibility. Then ipvsadm and other apps can know that the kernel
likes them. This will avoid the problem of using old ipvsadm with
new IPVS. There is no need for min or max versions that must match,
just a 2-byte protocol release code that must match.
> "warning: this version of ipvsadm hasn't been tested with ip_vs-x.x.x".
>
> Since I run with different kernel versions a lot, to keep all my
> versions of ipvsadm straight, I give them names like
Yes, you can keep different versions, it is difficult ipvsadm
to handle the old protocols.
> would it be possible to give ipvsadm a suffix like
>
> ipvsadm-ipvs_version-`uname -r`
or ipvsadm-<PROTOCOL_ID>-<IPVSADM_VERSION>
> Joe
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
|
