LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: Which failover technique?

To: Matt Chan <engineuity@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Which failover technique?
Cc: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:35:37 -0800 (PST)
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Matt Chan wrote:

I had added the route for director1 on dev tunl0
route add x.x.x.208 dev tunl0
I was under the impression that this was to send any packets "back" to
director1 through the tunl interface which is actually going back to the
client. Is this correct?

no. read the HOWTO on the packet flow for LVS-DR and LVS-Tun.

How can you add a route for it?

as you've done above.

The packets involved in health checking are independant of the LVS.

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!

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