LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: LVS-TUN setup - responses from realserver not being let through

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: LVS-TUN setup - responses from realserver not being let through
From: Roberto Nibali <ratz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:39:15 +0200
Unlimited traffic even.  But definitely best effort - they also have an
option for guaranteed bandwidth at 10Mb/s and 100Mb/s - but pricey.

Saw it, but that's tax deductible :)

I've been using Hetzner servers for more than 3 years - never had reason
to complain.  And I can even pay the bills through Postfinance in Bern.

Good to know. I think we should now defer future encomium of Hetzner to private emails :).

I can work with an LVS-NAT setup for now, but perhaps if we end up
renting more servers from Hetzner, we'll have some more leverage.
Since they host about 10'000 servers and 100'000 domains, I reckon you
need to invest heavily before the weighting in happens :).

Haha, you're probably right about that :-)

Back to the matter at hand - assuming I need to work around the IP
spoofing prevention, do I not have another option besides LVS-NAT - I'm thinking of a variation of LVS-DR, where the real servers do not
respond directly to the client, but route their answers through the
director (set up as the default gateway for the real servers) ?

Yes, you could try the forward shared approach:

    http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/#lvsgw

Specifically

    http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/forward_shared-2.6.17-2.diff

Let us know if you need more help with that.

Best regards,
Roberto Nibali, ratz
--
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq' | dc

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