Two reasons: - I have done it for ten years with NAT and am happy with it.
- I use the LVS also as firewall (turned off now during testing) and do not want a direct connection from outside to the real servers (i.e. no cable). All traffic must go through the LVS and its firewall.
I am sure that you have arguments against NAT, but I am really content with it and do not want to change. I just want the new router to get to work like the old one does since years, with the same configuration, just a new kernel.
On 26.11.11 19:54, solarflow99 wrote:
Why can't you just use direct routing? On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Alois Treindl <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I used tcpdump to look at the network traffic, looking at both interfaces of the LVS by running two tcdump processes. The httpd real server introduces 200 millisecond delays between packets when sending. When I reconfigure the network so that I can connect directly without LVS to the real server, there are no such delays in the traffic. I (believe to) see the ACK packages from the http client in both cases, they do not seem to get lost. _______________________________________________ rhelv6-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
_______________________________________________ rhelv6-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
