LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: LVS via Direct routing

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: LVS via Direct routing
From: Ramprasad A Padmanabhan <ramprasad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 15:06:21 +0530
On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 14:01, Volker Dormeyer wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 01:27:52PM +0530,
> Ramprasad A Padmanabhan <ramprasad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  > On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 18:37, Graham David Purcocks M.A.(Oxon.) wrote:
>  > > You can only use DR if all machines are on the same network. If you are
>  > > on different networks, you need NAT and if you want to do port
>  > > redirection, and you can tunnel over WANs
>  > 
>  > I have a doubt , when you say "all machines on the same n/w" you mean
>  > all the server machines right ? The client can connect to the server
>  > pool behind the LVS from anywhere in the internet.
> 
> All real server machines and the LVS system itself are meant here. The
> sketch on [1] should make it clear. Yes, the clients can connect from
> anywhere.
> 
>    1. http://www.linux-vs.org/VS-DRouting.html
>  

    In case of an HTTP server most of the data is from the HTTP server
to the client. And so the throughput is high , since the server to
client packets are directly routed from the server and not the LVS
    Will there be any drop of throughput if I use LVS for a set of SMTP
servers. Because these SMTP servers are going to recieve mails , and
most of the packets are client to server. These packets have to routed
via the LVS only
    Is there anyone already using LVS for SMTP servers


Thanks
Ram
   


----------------------------------------------------------
Netcore Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
Website:  http://www.netcore.co.in
Spamtraps: http://cleanmail.netcore.co.in/directory.html
----------------------------------------------------------

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>