LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: [lvs-users] LVS with all clients behind a single router. lvs-tun on

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [lvs-users] LVS with all clients behind a single router. lvs-tun on 2.6 kernel
From: Matthew Smart <msmart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:40:58 -0500
>> People keep talking about sessions, but I don't know what 
>> they're doing. I assume the client has a cookie which the 
>> servers recognise (via mysql replication). Presumably the 
>> clients keep hitting different realservers as part of their 
>> session (which I guess has state - eg a shopping cart) and 
>> you have to pass the state info around too. Is this what 
>> you're doing?
>>     
Yes that is exactly right.  We have state info stored server side in a 
PHP session.  Client side there is a cookie that holds a session id only 
(no state).  We are working on ways to replicate the server side session 
info across N real servers.  I think relying on mysql will work in the 
short term. Just have to test it under load to see how it behaves. I can 
see an issue if mysql replication gets behind on a server, but that is 
not an LVS issue...


>
> The machines behind the NAT router call from high ports in 
> order. So say you're websurfing and you've just fired up the 
> homecomputer, The first call to VIP:80 will come from 
> CIP:1025. When that tcpip connection is closed down, the 
> next call to VIP:80 will come from CIP:1026 etc. These calls 
> get nat'ed into a similar monotonic series of ports from the 
> NAT router (with 2.2 linux starting somewhere up near 
> 40,000, but now starting with port 1025). Originally there 
> was a separate range reserved for each client (I think), 
> allowing the ISP to watch for multiple clients behind the 
> nat router. Now I think theirs only one range (to stop this 
> pattern being observed).
>
>   
So Graeme's solutions looks like our best bet.  The good news for us is 
that we have 100% control of the client routers and are not trying to 
hide our activity from an isp. So I should be able to tweak the router 
in such a way that it behaves in a consistent manner with regard to port 
usage, and that should allow me to implement Graeme's solution with a 
reasonable level of assurance that clients will stay within the 
designated port ranges... I hope :)


Thanks for the info,

Matthew Smart
President
Smart Software Solutions Inc.
108 S Pierre St.
Pierre, SD 57501

Phone: (605) 280-0383
Skype: msmart13
Email: msmart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.



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