|
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 14:00, Horms wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 01:56:51PM +0700, Ariyo Nugroho wrote:
> > Hi Horms! Hi everybody!
> >
> > Yes, Horms, you're right. LVS-NAT works well with ftp. I did like what
> > you told me: insmod the ip_vs_ftp module.And then I add ftp service to
> > ipvsadm table, make it persistent. Using fwmark, I also opened all ports
> > 1024:65355.
> >
> > But, something strange happened. I just wonder, what would happen if I
> > don't have ip_vs_ftp loaded? So, I rmmod ip_vs_ftp, and ... It still
> > works!
> >
> > Hmm.. what does it mean? Why it can happen? It shouldn't work right?
> >
> > BTW, would you please explain to me, what actually ip_vs_ftp does?
>
> Did you test this with both active and passive mode ftp?
Yes, I did. And it works smoothly... I can 'ls', I can 'cd', and I can
'get' files. All without ip_vs_ftp module loaded, in both mode.
So? I'm really wondering. It's mysterious.
Does it mean that we do not need the module anymore? (I'm using ipvs
V1.0.10 with kernel 2.4.21).
BTW, because it works fine, I think we can simply ignore this, and keep
focus on other more important issues ;)
Ariyo
|
