|
On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 13:29 -0400, deKlerk, Ken wrote:
> Yes I've seen that fix with the fwmark and have tried to implement all
> the setting there but it came to the same result. I'm having this
> problem from other hosts in the 172.16.0.0 network that are not the
> clients as well. This is why I posted the question because it seems
> like different behaviours.
It's identical.
The problem stems from the fact that the directors and the clients are
on the same network. See the following:
Client 172.16.0.5
Realserver 172.16.0.100
Director 172.16.0.254
VIP 10.23.34.45
When Client makes a request to the VIP, the Director receives it and
passes it to the Realserver with the destination IP changed to that of
the Realserver.
Because the Realserver and the Client are on the same network, the reply
from the Realserver goes directly to the Client. The Client ignores that
packet, because it doesn't come from the VIP.
Thus the connection never gets established.
One thing you might be able to do, however, is to make the Realserver
have *no route* to the local network (tune this to fit):
route delete -net 172.16.0.0/24 dev eth0
Then have an explicit route to the default gateway:
route add -net default gw 172.16.0.254 dev eth0
That _might_ get you what you want, at the cost of all traffic from the
realservers having to go through the director.
Graeme
_______________________________________________
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/
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
|
