|
If not, is trying something like this (balancing between the balancers)
worthwhile?
Director VIP:2222 (Balances load with NAT between
Director_TUN andDirector_NAT)
Director_TUN VIP_Tun:80 Director_NAT VIP_Nat:8080
ServerA:80 TUN ServerC:8090 NAT
ServerC:8190 NAT
¿Should I choose between jumps and multiple instances or do you think there
could be a way to have the balancer working with both features?
Thanks,
Mikel Ruiz
-----Mensaje original-----
De: lvs-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:lvs-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]En nombre de Joseph Mack
NA3T
Enviado el: viernes, 08 de julio de 2005 16:19
Para: LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list.
Asunto: Re: Mix LVS-TUN and LVS-NAT
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Mikel RUIZ ECHEVERRIA wrote:
> ¿But is there a way to have this working?
>
> VIP:80
> ServerA:80 TUN
> ServerC:8090 NAT
> ServerC:8190 NAT
you can only have one forwarding method for each virtual
service, so that the load balancing information
for all realservers is in one table. So you can't
have the director with VIP:80 forwarding this
service to realservers by TUN and by NAT at the same
time.
> If not, is trying something like this (balance between the balancers)
> worthwhile?
the rest of this didn't survive the e-mail.
Try with small number of blanks and no tabs.
Joe
--
Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina
jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map
generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml
Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux!
|
