On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 02:17:01PM +0100, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> I'm running ldirectord with
> http://hg.linux-ha.org/agents/rev/6e8b562f5414 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
> which results in
> Error  reading file /etc/ldirectord.cf at line 15: duplicate virtual
> 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
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
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