|
Hey,
Like I said in my last message, we are doing it for port 80 traffic.
Which at the location in question is about 80% of the bandwidth being used.
Also, I think that if you use the "Direct Routing" method you can get
away with out the proxy requirements.
Michael
Graeme Fowler wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 10:29 -0700, Michael Gale wrote:
>> This is doable under certain conditions:
> <snip explanation>
>
> Those conditions being that you know the application(s) being used and
> are able to put some sort of application-layer proxy in the way, then
> make LVS load-balance to that. This, regardless of which "way round" it
> appears, is still fairly simple application-level load balancing.
>
> AIUI the OP wanted something for "generic" traffic (Greg, correct this
> if I'm wrong!) - and that simply isn't possible, unless you've magicked
> a SOCKS proxy that understands, well, every application and protocol in
> the Universe ;-)
>
> Graeme
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
--
Michael Gale
Red Hat Certified Engineer
Network Administrator
Pason Systems Corp.
"Raising Elephants Is So Utterly Boring"
|
