On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Jonas Akrouh Larsen wrote: > TCP 192.168.100.35:80 rr > > -> 192.168.100.32:80 Local 1 0 0 > > -> 192.168.100.31:80 Route 1 0 0 > > > > As you can see the realserver 192.168.100.32:80 is listed > as Local. Which DO make sence since that realserver is > local to the director im issuing the command on.
do you have 4 boxes or 2? > Now here comes the problem: If I try to connect to the > service, it works 50% of the time. If it hits the Local > realserver everything works, but the other 50% of the > attemps it tries the other real server, and that just > fails. is the route set correctly for the 2nd realserver? Can you not send alternate blank lines? 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! _______________________________________________ LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - [email protected] Send requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
