Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Linux Virtual Server: Users

[lvs-users] In existing setup LocalDirector real servers don't use LD as gateway, why?

 

 

Linux Virtual Server users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


devnull at regxsolutions

Oct 21, 2009, 11:52 AM

Post #1 of 3 (766 views)
Permalink
[lvs-users] In existing setup LocalDirector real servers don't use LD as gateway, why?

I'm using LVS-NAT, from the documentation is says its based on cisco's
LocalDirector.

Goal is to basically remove the antiquated LocalDirector (has been
discontinued a while ago), and replace it with LVS-NAT. However, the real
servers in the current configuration do not use the local director as their
gateway, they use the firewall which is on the same subnet.

[Internet] ----> [Firewall] (172.16.1.1) ---> [Local Director] (172.16.1.5)
----> {Switch} ----> [Real Server] (172.16.1.55)

The real servers gateway is 172.16.1.1,

I understand why the real server would need the LVS-NAT as its gateway, but
im looking for a solution that can just replace the LocalDirector, is
LVS-NAT not what I'm looking for?

Thanks,


Kyle
_______________________________________________
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/

LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users [at] LinuxVirtualServer
Send requests to lvs-users-request [at] LinuxVirtualServer
or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users


pmarcus at factual

Oct 21, 2009, 3:09 PM

Post #2 of 3 (728 views)
Permalink
Re: [lvs-users] In existing setup LocalDirector real servers don't use LD as gateway, why? [In reply to]

LVS-NAT requires the Director to be its Gateway.

I think you are looking for LVS-DR.
That should do what you need.

Good luck!

-Philip


On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, devnull <devnull [at] regxsolutions> wrote:

> I'm using LVS-NAT, from the documentation is says its based on cisco's
> LocalDirector.
>
> Goal is to basically remove the antiquated LocalDirector (has been
> discontinued a while ago), and replace it with LVS-NAT. However, the real
> servers in the current configuration do not use the local director as their
> gateway, they use the firewall which is on the same subnet.
>
> [Internet] ----> [Firewall] (172.16.1.1) ---> [Local Director] (172.16.1.5)
> ----> {Switch} ----> [Real Server] (172.16.1.55)
>
> The real servers gateway is 172.16.1.1,
>
> I understand why the real server would need the LVS-NAT as its gateway, but
> im looking for a solution that can just replace the LocalDirector, is
> LVS-NAT not what I'm looking for?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Kyle
> _______________________________________________
> Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
> http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/
>
> LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users [at] LinuxVirtualServer
> Send requests to lvs-users-request [at] LinuxVirtualServer
> or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
>
_______________________________________________
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/

LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users [at] LinuxVirtualServer
Send requests to lvs-users-request [at] LinuxVirtualServer
or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users


malcolm at loadbalancer

Oct 21, 2009, 11:53 PM

Post #3 of 3 (724 views)
Permalink
Re: [lvs-users] In existing setup LocalDirector real servers don't use LD as gateway, why? [In reply to]

Kyle,

It sounds like your localdirector is in bridging mode (servers
physically wired through the cisco box to the router?)

http://www.austintek.com/LVS/LVS-HOWTO/HOWTO/LVS-HOWTO.transparent_bridging.html

LVS doesn't really support it (although Barracuda got it working somehow).

Either try DR as previously suggested or change your topology for NAT.

Or possibly single network (one-arm) NAT (requires routing change on
the servers).




2009/10/21 devnull <devnull [at] regxsolutions>
>

>
> [Internet] ----> [Firewall] (172.16.1.1) ---> [Local Director] (172.16.1.5)
> ----> {Switch} ---->  [Real Server] (172.16.1.55)
>
> The real servers gateway is 172.16.1.1,
>
> I understand why the real server would need the LVS-NAT as its gateway, but
> im looking for a solution that can just replace the LocalDirector, is
> LVS-NAT not what I'm looking for?
>


--
Regards,

Malcolm Turnbull.

Loadbalancer.org Ltd.
Phone: +44 (0)870 443 8779
http://www.loadbalancer.org/

_______________________________________________
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/

LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users [at] LinuxVirtualServer
Send requests to lvs-users-request [at] LinuxVirtualServer
or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users

Linux Virtual Server users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.