Questions about LVS-TUN

[Joseph Mack NA3T]

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Bill Omer wrote:

> *Should* be ran, yes, I agree.  However I did run in to a situation
> where this did happen, which is far from the fault of lvs its self,
> but it is reasoning for why I want to find a new solution.

I don't know your situation, but I expect fixing the 
original problem will be simpler. You shouldn't be trying to 
run LVS on a machine in an invalid state.

>> rr helps here. Still the thundering herd problem has to be
>> handled in user space (until someone writes a fix).
>
> Implementing LVS in this environment was to get around using DNS based
> Round Robin, so this would be counter productive.

the problem with DNS based load balancing is the long time 
scale of DNS, not the round robin part.

> Traffic does go to the realservers, but the DST is that of the VIP.
> There has to be modifications to the realserver in order for it to
> accept that traffic.

you have one realserver, or many? If one, just let it have 
the VIP. If many, do you want all of them to have the VIP?

Joe

-- 
Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina
jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map
generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml
Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux!