|
Hello,
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Graeme Fowler wrote:
> On Sat 03 Sep 2005 11:52:41 BST , Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > I'm expecting confirmation from people with the problem that reply
> > packets were not translated from IPVS.
>
> With several days of use in production I can state that the patches
> supplied appear to have fixed both the:
>
> = persistence "breaking" with the use of ip_vs_ftp
> = "NOT HIT" on return packets.
>
> Empirical observations indicate that I'm now not seeing the "NOT HIT"
> messages on anywhere near the same frequency I was, and my outgoing
> iptables ruleset is certainly not clocking up packets to be masqueraded
> at anywhere near the same rate.
>
> From my perspective, assuming that nothing else appears to be broken,
> these patches look good to me.
ok, thanks to you and to Jari Takkala for the tests.
It seems the problems reported from many users in last 2 years and
more are now fixed. The plan is to send the patches upstream tomorrow.
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
|
