LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

[lvs-users] IPVSADM/IPTables question

To: <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [lvs-users] IPVSADM/IPTables question
From: "Gary W. Smith" <gary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:05:34 -0700
I need to put together a firewall for a site that will also have a need for 
ipvsadm services running with it.  Our original idea was to forward several of 
the external IP's into a second box, behind the wall, running ipvsadm.
 
When rethinking about the problem, we thought that we might be able to just run 
iptables and ipvsadm on the same box.  I recall from an issue I had a couple 
years back that this might not be possible.  So I'm checking to see if it is 
and if so, what I should expect.  
 
Here is a breif overview of the network.  My understanding is that for 
iptables, I would be using the IN path, instead of forward.  The example is 
simplified.  We use fairly restrictive firewalls as well, just trying to work 
through a sample.
 
Externally we have 6 public IP's.  We'll say 1.1.1.0/29, internally we have 
10.0.0.0/24.
 
* Firewall would be 1.1.1.2 on eth0
* Firewall would also have aliases for 1.1.1.3, 1.1.1.4, and 1.1.1.5 on eth0
* Firewall has internal address 10.0.0.1/24 on eth1
* Firewall has port forwarding set
 
* Real Server 1 has internal address of 10.0.0.5/25 on eth0
* Real Server 1 has external address of 1.1.1.3/32 on lo
 
* Real Server 2 has internal address of 10.0.0.6/25 on eth0
* Real Server 2 has external address of 1.1.1.3/32 on lo 
 
* Real Server 3 has internal address of 10.0.0.7/25 on eth0
* Real Server 3 has external address of 1.1.1.3/32 on lo
 
ipvsadm rules would look like this:
-A -t 1.1.1.3:80 -s wlc
-a -t 1.1.1.3:80 -r 10.0.0.5 -g -w 100
-a -t 1.1.1.3:80 -r 10.0.0.6 -g -w 100
-a -t 1.1.1.3:80 -r 10.0.0.7 -g -w 100
 
iptables would have this:
 
-A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT
 
Does this sound reasonable?  Will it work?  Is there anything that I should 
worry about?
 
 
 

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