I actually liked the arptables method (have used the iptables one too which also works well but the arptables one is better for performance). I wonder if the sysctl method is better for performance than the arptables one (I suspect it doesn't matter unless you're maxing out your hardware). I think the sysctl method is more dependent on how your interfaces are set up than the arptables method though?
-h -- Hari Sekhon http://www.linkedin.com/in/harisekhon Jon Gray wrote: > Actually I just finished reading > http://www.austintek.com/LVS/LVS-HOWTO/HOWTO/LVS-HOWTO.arp_problem.html > about 5 minutes before your reply and applied the following to my > sysctl.conf: > > net.ipv4.conf.eth0.arp_ignore = 1 > net.ipv4.conf.eth0.arp_announce = 2 > net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_ignore = 1 > net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_announce = 2 > > And now it seems to be working again. Thanks for the quick reply Graeme! > > > Graeme Fowler wrote: > >> On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 08:35 -0400, Jon Gray wrote: >> >> >>> We recently moved to a new data center and both of our load balancers >>> are now exhibiting some strange behavior. >>> >>> >> ...which sounds to me very much like "The ARP Problem". >> >> One of your realservers is sending out ARP replies for the VIP and ends >> up handling all the traffic directly, alone. >> >> There are many ways to solve this - the best way being to use >> appropriate sysctls. This is documented in the HOWTO, and on >> linuxvirtualserver.org. >> >> Graeme >> _______________________________________________ Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at: http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/ LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - [email protected] Send requests to [email protected] or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
