Re: [lvs-users] IPVSADM/IPTables question

To: " users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, " users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [lvs-users] IPVSADM/IPTables question
From: "Gary W. Smith" <gary@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 11:17:12 -0700
Thanks for the info.  I'm going to try to setup a test environment tonight or 
tomorrow and play around with it.  I just didn't want to waste the time if it 
was something that wouldn't work in the long run.


From: lvs-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Joseph Mack NA3T
Sent: Wed 9/12/2007 11:04 AM
To: users mailing list.
Subject: Re: [lvs-users] IPVSADM/IPTables question

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Gary W. Smith wrote:

>> sometimes it works OK and sometimes it doesn't.
> So is this something you would recommend we explore, or just go back to
> using a dual server system?  When it does work, does it work reliably or
> does it sometimes fail?

the problem is collisions between iptables rules and what
ip_vs() does with the packets. It's written up in the HOWTO.
Just keep adding rules. If it works once, it will work

>> use secondary IPs not aliases.
> Sorry, again terminology, but then again, let me ask the question.  We
> add additiona IP's in to /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth:<id>.
> Is that considered secondary or alias?

I don't use any of these market enhanced versions of
ethernet configuring tools. I know other people are happy
with them.

> Or should we be using ip addr add?

whatever you get to work first.

> We reject everything to begin with.  I was wanted to make sure I was on
> the right track.  I still assume that I want to use IN and not FORWARD
> (at least at this point) as the traffic is technically coming into the
> firewall).



Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina
jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map
generator at
Homepage It's GNU/Linux!

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