Re: [lvs-users] IPv6 vs IPv4 fwmark services

To: Ferenc Wagner <wferi@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [lvs-users] IPv6 vs IPv4 fwmark services
Cc: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 08:39:24 +0900
On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 02:17:01PM +0100, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm running ldirectord with
> applied for better IPv6
> support.  Basically, it works fine, thanks for implementing this.  But I
> wonder whether there's a fundamental reason for not allowing IPv4 and
> IPv6 virtual services with the same fwmark, like
> virtual=1
>   [...]
> virtual6=1
>   [...]
> which results in
> Error [21297] reading file /etc/ at line 15: duplicate virtual 
> server
> if tried.  Is this only an overzealous sanity check in ldirectord, or
> are iptables and ip6tables fwmarks actually related somehow?
> Two loosely related subquestions:
>   1. Did anybody think about somehow enabling symbolic fwmarks in
>      virtual service declarations?

My initial reaction is that this is just an oversight.

>   2. Why aren't IPv6 real server addresses resolved from DNS in the
>      ipvsadm -L output, just like IPv4 ones are?

I am surprised that doesn't work, I suspect it is also
an oversight.

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>