This page:
http://kb.linuxvirtualserver.org/wiki/IPv6_load_balancing
says LVS "mostly works" with IPv6. Is that still true?
The page is apparenty 11 years old.
"probably some incorrect handling of ICMPv6 or other corner cases"
looks disturbing. I assume we can cope with the rest, e.g.
fragmentation -> reduce TCPMSS in ip(6)tables as with IPv4.
I'm wary of adding an IPv6 address to an existing service which
currently works fine, since that means many clients will switch
from IPv4 to IPv6 and maybe experience reduced connection quality.
Some clients do strange things with internet protocols, I cannot
guess which IPv6 "corner cases" would be used.
--
Hallvard
_______________________________________________
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
Send requests to lvs-users-request@LinuxVirtualServer.org
or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
http://kb.linuxvirtualserver.org/wiki/IPv6_load_balancing
says LVS "mostly works" with IPv6. Is that still true?
The page is apparenty 11 years old.
"probably some incorrect handling of ICMPv6 or other corner cases"
looks disturbing. I assume we can cope with the rest, e.g.
fragmentation -> reduce TCPMSS in ip(6)tables as with IPv4.
I'm wary of adding an IPv6 address to an existing service which
currently works fine, since that means many clients will switch
from IPv4 to IPv6 and maybe experience reduced connection quality.
Some clients do strange things with internet protocols, I cannot
guess which IPv6 "corner cases" would be used.
--
Hallvard
_______________________________________________
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
Send requests to lvs-users-request@LinuxVirtualServer.org
or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users