|
On 2 July 2010 10:07, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 09:48:20AM +0200, Anders Franzen wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 16:05 +0200, Kristoffer Egefelt wrote:
> > > Hi list
> > > I've been working around this issue for years using split DNS, DNAT
> > > rules which bypasses LVS etc. - now I really need this to work the
> > > "correct" way, ie. realservers can connect to VIP's the exact same way
> > > internet clients can.
>
>
> I wonder if using Full NAT support, which I am trying to get merged, is an
> answer to this.
>
> http://archive.linuxvirtualserver.org/html/lvs-devel/2010-05/msg00000.html
>
I tend to use HAProxy in any situation where LVS/FullNAT (Which I call
SNAT would be used).
But it would be great to get support added if it doesn't break anything :-).
Let me know if you need any help testing.
Thanks.
--
Regards,
Malcolm Turnbull.
Loadbalancer.org Ltd.
Phone: +44 (0)870 443 8779
http://www.loadbalancer.org/
_______________________________________________
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
|
