Re: [lvs-users] loopback network vs IPv6

To: " users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [lvs-users] loopback network vs IPv6
From: Ferenc Wagner <wferi@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 11:28:52 +0100
Ferenc Wagner <wferi@xxxxxxx> writes:

> If I add an IPv4 network to the loopback device, that answers all
> addresses in the network, which is convenient on the fwmark-based
> director (with a corresponding static network route configured on the
> upstream router).  These altogether make VIP-less director possible.
> But if I try to do the same with IPv6, no dice.  If I add an IPv6
> network to the loopback device, that does NOT answer all the addresses
> in the network, and even if I add a local route for the network, that
> shows up as unreachable in the routing table listing.
> Is it possible to employ some trick to "localize" a network of IPv6
> addresses, so that IPVS catches and routes them?

Looks like the Any-IP support added to 2.6.37 solves this with utter
elegance: 'ip route add PREFIX dev lo' is enough in itself.  At least
until the IPVS hook moves into FORWARD...

Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at: mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
or go to

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