On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 08:45:53AM +0000, Dean Scothern wrote: > Hi, > > I'm a little confused when you talk about 'the patch' > > Is this the section that is relevant: > https://github.com/horms/ipvs/tree/v2.6.35.4-ipvs-backport/include/net
A patch is a method of describing changes to a tree of source code. I believe that the patch you are after is "ipvs: changes for local real server". http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/horms/ipvs.git;a=patch;h=fc604767613b6d2036cdc35b660bc39451040a47 Looking over the logs, you may also want to consider the following subsequent patches: * ipvs: changes for local client http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/horms/ipvs.git;a=patch;h=cb59155f21d4c0507d2034c2953f6a3f7806913d * ipvs: restore support for iptables SNAT http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/horms/ipvs.git;a=patch;h=afb523c54718da57ff661950bd3287ec9eeb66bd > I'm trying to get the behaviour working on a rhel/centos 6 kernel which is > based on 2.6.32. > > To my unpractised eye the differences between ipvs on vanilla 2.6.32.4 and > 2.6.35.4 do not seem too great. It seems involved on adding SCTP support. > I'm hoping (probably futile) that I might be able to use the files in the url > above with little or no alteration. > Is that a vain hope? There do seem to be some more changes, but nothing that seems particularly relevant. > Also to clarify, the new behaviour is that for ipvs nat to a IP on the > node, the application needs to listen on the RIP and not the VIP? If you use the MASQ forwarding mechanism and the RIP is a local IP address on the director, then it will be handled locally. In this case the RIP and the VIP may be the same address. _______________________________________________ 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
