|
Hello list,
The servers in our IDC are connected to two ISPs,given the ISPs' name are TEL
and CNC.
All the OS are RedHat Linux AS4.For RealServer,they have two ethernet
interfaces.Before the LVS NAT go online,one interface was connected to TEL
link,another was connected to CNC link.
Now we run the LVS NAT for both TEL and CNC links.So the RealServers would
change to use private IPs.
Given the logic structure below (Please view this message under HTML form):
TEL LVS CNC LVS
-------------------------- ----------------------------
rip: 59.32.232.1 rip: 221.5.57.1
vip: 59.32.232.2 vip: 221.5.57.2
private_ip:192.168.1.1 private_ip:192.168.2.1
nat_route_ip:192.168.1.2 nat_route_ip:192.168.2.2
-------------------------- ----------------------------
| |
| |
| |
| Switch for both LAN |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the same swith,both 192.168.1.x/24 and 192.168.2.x/24 are connected to
it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | |
|
|1.3 |2.3 |1.4 |2.4 |1.5 |2.5 |1.x
|2.x
----------------- ---------------- ----------------
---------------
RealServer01 RealServer02 RealServer03 more
others
----------------- ---------------- ----------------
---------------
On RealServers we do the Policy Route using Linux's rt_tables.It means,for
example,the requests' data packages are coming from eth0 into the OS,then it
will go back out from eth0.The same if the data packages are coming from eth1
into the OS,it will go back out from eth1.
(If we don't do the Policy Route,then all the return packages will go back from
the default gateway,maybe via eth0 or eth1,but not both.)
My question is,here both LANs are connected to the same switch,is it
reasonable?Will it make some network conflict?
Thanks for all.
|
