Mailing List Archive

On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 11:18:11AM +0100, smajer@advance-bank.de wrote:
>
>
> Hi All
>
> I guess only the following changes are necessary to successfully aplly against
> 2.2.18
>
Agreed. I applied ipvs-1.02-2.2.17 against kernel 2.2.17 first and
then applied kernel patch-2.2.18. Everything works like a charm.

Wenzhuo

> --- ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.17.patch Sun Dec 3 05:39:27 2000
> +++ ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.18.patch Tue Dec 12 10:27:10 2000
> @@ -194,7 +194,8 @@
> @@ -271,6 +272,32 @@
> NET_IPV4_CONF_BOOTP_RELAY=10,
> NET_IPV4_CONF_LOG_MARTIANS=11,
> - NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12
> + NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12,
> + NET_IPV4_CONF_ARPFILTER=13
> +};
> +
> +/* /proc/sys/net/ipv4/vs */
>
>
>
> greetings
>
> stefan majer
> x-cellent technologies gmbh
> rosenkavalierplatz 5
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

i am new to lvs, well i installed lvs in the summer on two of our severs
but, had to deinstall it because multiple lvs support didn't work. so now i
am back and installed lvs 1.0.0 for kernel 2.2.17 on a original red hat
distribution.

does ipvsadm 1.0.0. for kernel 2.2.17 report IPS and ports in hex where
0.96, I think it was reports the ip in dotted form. Or did I do something
wrong? BTW what version do you guys recommend for a mission critical
cluster?

-----Original Message-----
From: Wenzhuo Zhang [mailto:wenzhuo@online.sh.cn]
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 10:04 PM
To: lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
Subject: Re: 2.2.18


On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 11:18:11AM +0100, smajer@advance-bank.de wrote:
>
>
> Hi All
>
> I guess only the following changes are necessary to successfully aplly
against
> 2.2.18
>
Agreed. I applied ipvs-1.02-2.2.17 against kernel 2.2.17 first and
then applied kernel patch-2.2.18. Everything works like a charm.

Wenzhuo

> --- ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.17.patch Sun Dec 3 05:39:27 2000
> +++ ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.18.patch Tue Dec 12 10:27:10 2000
> @@ -194,7 +194,8 @@
> @@ -271,6 +272,32 @@
> NET_IPV4_CONF_BOOTP_RELAY=10,
> NET_IPV4_CONF_LOG_MARTIANS=11,
> - NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12
> + NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12,
> + NET_IPV4_CONF_ARPFILTER=13
> +};
> +
> +/* /proc/sys/net/ipv4/vs */
>
>
>
> greetings
>
> stefan majer
> x-cellent technologies gmbh
> rosenkavalierplatz 5
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
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

On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:45:48AM -0600, Patrick Panzenboeck wrote:
> i am new to lvs, well i installed lvs in the summer on two of our severs
> but, had to deinstall it because multiple lvs support didn't work. so now i
> am back and installed lvs 1.0.0 for kernel 2.2.17 on a original red hat
> distribution.

Multiple lvs support? What does this mean?

> does ipvsadm 1.0.0. for kernel 2.2.17 report IPS and ports in hex where
> 0.96, I think it was reports the ip in dotted form. Or did I do something
> wrong? BTW what version do you guys recommend for a mission critical
> cluster?

To my knowledge all versions of ipvsadm as supplied from
linuxvirtualserver.org and mirrors report IP addresses in dotted quad. I
believe that Red Hat has/does ship a version of ipvsadm patched to report
addresses in hex. The reason for this is unclear other than it seems to be
a compatinbility issue with Piranah.

I would recomment the latest verion of IPVS as it has all the latest
bug fixes. If you wish to use Piranah you should use whatever
version of LVS and ipvsadm are shipped with Piranah.

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wenzhuo Zhang [mailto:wenzhuo@online.sh.cn]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 10:04 PM
> To: lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
> Subject: Re: 2.2.18
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 11:18:11AM +0100, smajer@advance-bank.de wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi All
> >
> > I guess only the following changes are necessary to successfully aplly
> against
> > 2.2.18
> >
> Agreed. I applied ipvs-1.02-2.2.17 against kernel 2.2.17 first and
> then applied kernel patch-2.2.18. Everything works like a charm.
>
> Wenzhuo
>
> > --- ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.17.patch Sun Dec 3 05:39:27 2000
> > +++ ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.18.patch Tue Dec 12 10:27:10 2000
> > @@ -194,7 +194,8 @@
> > @@ -271,6 +272,32 @@
> > NET_IPV4_CONF_BOOTP_RELAY=10,
> > NET_IPV4_CONF_LOG_MARTIANS=11,
> > - NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12
> > + NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12,
> > + NET_IPV4_CONF_ARPFILTER=13
> > +};
> > +
> > +/* /proc/sys/net/ipv4/vs */
> >
> >
> >
> > greetings
> >
> > stefan majer
> > x-cellent technologies gmbh
> > rosenkavalierplatz 5
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

--
Horms

with multiple lvs i mean haveing more then one vs on a box.

in regards to redhat, can i still use the piranha config tool with IPVS
1.0.2 and ipvsadmn that you guys distribute or do i need to use something
else?

thanks patrick

-----Original Message-----
From: Horms [mailto:horms@vergenet.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 1:34 PM
To: lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
Subject: Re: 2.2.18


On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:45:48AM -0600, Patrick Panzenboeck wrote:
> i am new to lvs, well i installed lvs in the summer on two of our severs
> but, had to deinstall it because multiple lvs support didn't work. so now
i
> am back and installed lvs 1.0.0 for kernel 2.2.17 on a original red hat
> distribution.

Multiple lvs support? What does this mean?

> does ipvsadm 1.0.0. for kernel 2.2.17 report IPS and ports in hex where
> 0.96, I think it was reports the ip in dotted form. Or did I do something
> wrong? BTW what version do you guys recommend for a mission critical
> cluster?

To my knowledge all versions of ipvsadm as supplied from
linuxvirtualserver.org and mirrors report IP addresses in dotted quad. I
believe that Red Hat has/does ship a version of ipvsadm patched to report
addresses in hex. The reason for this is unclear other than it seems to be
a compatinbility issue with Piranah.

I would recomment the latest verion of IPVS as it has all the latest
bug fixes. If you wish to use Piranah you should use whatever
version of LVS and ipvsadm are shipped with Piranah.

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wenzhuo Zhang [mailto:wenzhuo@online.sh.cn]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 10:04 PM
> To: lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
> Subject: Re: 2.2.18
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 11:18:11AM +0100, smajer@advance-bank.de wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi All
> >
> > I guess only the following changes are necessary to successfully aplly
> against
> > 2.2.18
> >
> Agreed. I applied ipvs-1.02-2.2.17 against kernel 2.2.17 first and
> then applied kernel patch-2.2.18. Everything works like a charm.
>
> Wenzhuo
>
> > --- ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.17.patch Sun Dec 3 05:39:27 2000
> > +++ ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.18.patch Tue Dec 12 10:27:10 2000
> > @@ -194,7 +194,8 @@
> > @@ -271,6 +272,32 @@
> > NET_IPV4_CONF_BOOTP_RELAY=10,
> > NET_IPV4_CONF_LOG_MARTIANS=11,
> > - NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12
> > + NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12,
> > + NET_IPV4_CONF_ARPFILTER=13
> > +};
> > +
> > +/* /proc/sys/net/ipv4/vs */
> >
> >
> >
> > greetings
> >
> > stefan majer
> > x-cellent technologies gmbh
> > rosenkavalierplatz 5
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

--
Horms

_______________________________________________
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

On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 02:03:54PM -0600, Patrick Panzenboeck wrote:
> with multiple lvs i mean haveing more then one vs on a box.

That has always worked with LVS. I can only imagine the problem
was with Piranha.

> in regards to redhat, can i still use the piranha config tool with IPVS
> 1.0.2 and ipvsadmn that you guys distribute or do i need to use something
> else?

You should address that question to piranha-list@redhat.com .

Basically Red Hat have done some non-standard things that seem to break
compatibility if you use stock tools with Prianha. You should talk to Red
Hat about details of this.

> thanks patrick
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Horms [mailto:horms@vergenet.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 1:34 PM
> To: lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
> Subject: Re: 2.2.18
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:45:48AM -0600, Patrick Panzenboeck wrote:
> > i am new to lvs, well i installed lvs in the summer on two of our severs
> > but, had to deinstall it because multiple lvs support didn't work. so now
> i
> > am back and installed lvs 1.0.0 for kernel 2.2.17 on a original red hat
> > distribution.
>
> Multiple lvs support? What does this mean?
>
> > does ipvsadm 1.0.0. for kernel 2.2.17 report IPS and ports in hex where
> > 0.96, I think it was reports the ip in dotted form. Or did I do something
> > wrong? BTW what version do you guys recommend for a mission critical
> > cluster?
>
> To my knowledge all versions of ipvsadm as supplied from
> linuxvirtualserver.org and mirrors report IP addresses in dotted quad. I
> believe that Red Hat has/does ship a version of ipvsadm patched to report
> addresses in hex. The reason for this is unclear other than it seems to be
> a compatinbility issue with Piranah.
>
> I would recomment the latest verion of IPVS as it has all the latest
> bug fixes. If you wish to use Piranah you should use whatever
> version of LVS and ipvsadm are shipped with Piranah.
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wenzhuo Zhang [mailto:wenzhuo@online.sh.cn]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 10:04 PM
> > To: lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
> > Subject: Re: 2.2.18
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 11:18:11AM +0100, smajer@advance-bank.de wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > I guess only the following changes are necessary to successfully aplly
> > against
> > > 2.2.18
> > >
> > Agreed. I applied ipvs-1.02-2.2.17 against kernel 2.2.17 first and
> > then applied kernel patch-2.2.18. Everything works like a charm.
> >
> > Wenzhuo
> >
> > > --- ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.17.patch Sun Dec 3 05:39:27 2000
> > > +++ ipvs-1.0.2-2.2.18.patch Tue Dec 12 10:27:10 2000
> > > @@ -194,7 +194,8 @@
> > > @@ -271,6 +272,32 @@
> > > NET_IPV4_CONF_BOOTP_RELAY=10,
> > > NET_IPV4_CONF_LOG_MARTIANS=11,
> > > - NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12
> > > + NET_IPV4_CONF_HIDDEN=12,
> > > + NET_IPV4_CONF_ARPFILTER=13
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +/* /proc/sys/net/ipv4/vs */
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > greetings
> > >
> > > stefan majer
> > > x-cellent technologies gmbh
> > > rosenkavalierplatz 5
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
> --
> Horms
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

--
Horms

Horms wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:45:48AM -0600, Patrick Panzenboeck wrote:
> > i am new to lvs, well i installed lvs in the summer on two of our severs
> > but, had to deinstall it because multiple lvs support didn't work. so now i
> > am back and installed lvs 1.0.0 for kernel 2.2.17 on a original red hat
> > distribution.
>
> Multiple lvs support? What does this mean?

I'm assuming that you mean running more than one virtual service
eg http and dns for example
Certainly this is quite possible and within the scope of all the HA systems for
linux that I'm aware of.

Could you elaborate on what services you were trying to provide and in what
manner it failed?
Incidentally this should really be sent over to the piranha-list as opposed to
the lvs-users list.

> > does ipvsadm 1.0.0. for kernel 2.2.17 report IPS and ports in hex where
> > 0.96, I think it was reports the ip in dotted form. Or did I do something
> > wrong? BTW what version do you guys recommend for a mission critical
> > cluster?
>
> To my knowledge all versions of ipvsadm as supplied from
> linuxvirtualserver.org and mirrors report IP addresses in dotted quad. I
> believe that Red Hat has/does ship a version of ipvsadm patched to report
> addresses in hex. The reason for this is unclear other than it seems to be
> a compatinbility issue with Piranah.

Piranha doesn't care what ipvsadm's ouput is, it has no use for it so I don't
know why a special version was made, this may have been before when I joined
though 8/
I've been supplying/dusting the versions off
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/software/index.html in the piranha enviroment
ever since I started work at RHAT a year ago. I'd be intrested in what rpm
package it was from though (ie rpm -qf `which ipvsadm`)

As stands, the current officially supported version is 2.2.16 using ipvs 0.9.12
and ipvsadm 1.11 with piranha 0.4.17

> I would recomment the latest verion of IPVS as it has all the latest
> bug fixes. If you wish to use Piranah you should use whatever
> version of LVS and ipvsadm are shipped with Piranah.

(Copied to the piranha-list)

Phil
=--=

On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:45:48AM -0600, Patrick Panzenboeck wrote:
> does ipvsadm 1.0.0. for kernel 2.2.17 report IPS and ports in hex where
> 0.96, I think it was reports the ip in dotted form. Or did I do something
> wrong? BTW what version do you guys recommend for a mission critical
> cluster?
>
I guess it's caused by the incompatibility between lvs and ipvsadm.
Use the version of the ipvsadm that's shipped with your ipvs-patch and
recompile it for each upgrade.

Wenzhuo