Re: [lvs-users] LVS with NAT - Help needed

To: " users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [lvs-users] LVS with NAT - Help needed
From: Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:09:37 -0700 (PDT)
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007, Fernando Gomes wrote:

> I Joe, thanks for your reply, my comments are on the body of the message
>> you'll have less oppotunities for trouble if you use
>> secondary IPs.
> Ok, but can you clarify why?

HOWTO: the section on iproute2 tools

>>> your opinion. I'm using also OpenVZ on all servers (including the
>>> Loadbalancers), but LVS is installed on the Hardware Node, not using
>>> OpenVZ at all. The problem I have is if I put a VE (virtual environment
>>> ~= virtual machine) on the standby loadbalancer and run on it a
>>> realserver.
>> I don't understand this sentence or know what the "it" is.
> Sorry, I'll try to clarify it, since this is the root of the problem.
> I'm running a virtual machine in the loadbalancer node that is not
> active (the standby loadbalancer), and that virtual machine is running a
> realserver (webserver) (the same virtual machine on the active
> loadbalancer works well). The test page requests work well, they come
> from the same network. The client requests that are transformed by the
> director are received, but the answer goes directly to the router, does
> not return to the director.

a hairy setup :-)

I expect the routing is being overridden by icmp redirects, 
hence my comment about one-network LVS-NAT

>> does your setup appear to be a one-network LVS-NAT (see
>> HOWTO)?
> Physically it is similar (all nodes on the same physical network),

so it's one network


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>