|
Sorry, must be going insane with all the reading that I've been doing on
LVS.
I should have said "Number of real servers".
In the Mini-howto LVS-Nat is low and DR/TUN are high.
Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Mack [mailto:mack.joseph@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, 5 November 2003 1:14 a.m.
To: LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list.
Subject: Re: LVS-Nat vs DR
Andrew Swaine wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> In the howto it recommends that LVS-NAT is used for small sites.
It's not true. Where do I say this and I'll fix it :-)
All of the forwarding methods are equally good.
> Is there a bandwidth limit / number of pages served that you would
> recommend changing from LVS-Nat to DR?
LVS-NAT was the first forwarder written and it got most of the early
attention. There is no arp problem with LVS-NAT. However service have to
run on the RIP rather than the VIP. With LVS-DR, the service runs on the
VIP but you have to handle the arp problem
Joe
--
Joseph Mack PhD, High Performance Computing & Scientific Visualization
SAIC, Supporting the EPA Research Triangle Park, NC 919-541-0007 Federal
Contact - John B. Smith 919-541-1087 - smith.johnb@xxxxxxx
|
