[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-virtual-server
Subject:    Re: Re: Re: LVS Director as default gw?
From:       Julian Anastasov <ja () ssi ! bg>
Date:       2003-05-22 11:07:45
[Download RAW message or body]


	Hello,

On Thu, 22 May 2003, Aihua Liu wrote:

> >	That will need allocating unique TCP/UDP port in the
> >director for each conn to the real servers.
>
>     Can you tell me why? Currently LVS-NAT mode don't need allocate unique
> TCP/UDP port in the director for each conn.

	Currently, CIP:CPORT is preserved and it is unique.
If director (192.168.0.1) creates connections to real server
192.168.0.2:80 then you can create 65k conns. Can the number of
original conns (before director) fit in this space considering
time wait sockets, etc?

if 1.2.3.4:1024->VIP:80 and 1.2.3.5:1024->VIP:80 are both mapped to
same 192.168.0.1:1024->192.168.0.2:80 what happens? The server's
TCP stack is confused.

> I want to implement this for multi-directors loadbalancing.

	I don't know what exactly is your setup but that can happen
for example in this way:

requests come from ISP1 to VIP1 and are served from LB1

requests come from ISP2 to VIP2 and are served from LB2

the real servers have source routes (LVS-DR):
from VIP1 to universe via LB1 or GW1
from VIP2 to universe via LB2 or GW2

with LVS-DR you can route the in->out traffic via any router you
want, even through LBx.

Regards

--
Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>

_______________________________________________
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
Send requests to lvs-users-request@LinuxVirtualServer.org
or go to http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]