RE: [squid-users] LVS/TUN or LVS/DR

Any particular reason why you're after DR mode? I have several squids load
balanced in masq mode and we're able to handle more traffic then most sites
can aspire too - with basically 0 load on the LVS server. You have to do
some monkey patching to get DR mode to work; I personally think unless one
can show performance limitations on why you should go that route, it is an
unnecessary complexity.

Andrew

--
Zope Managed Hosting
Systems Administrator/Software Engineer
Zope Corporation
(540) 361-1700 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henrik Nordstrom [mailto:hno@squid-cache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 7:11 AM
> To: Askar
> Cc: Squid Users
> Subject: Re: [squid-users] LVS/TUN or LVS/DR
> 
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Askar wrote:
> 
> > and yes all the caches are on the same switch, and we will also put the
> LVS
> > Director on the same switch with cache servers.
> > I thinks LVS/DR is what we have to go for ? :) sorry for my stupid
> question
> > again and again
> 
> Yes.
> 
> To make this setup simpler the LVS should have three network interfaces
> 
> 1: Client network
> 
> 2: Internet
> 
> 3: Cache servers
> 
> or alternatively two
> 
> 1: Client Network
> 
> 2: Internet + Cache Servers
> 
> 
> 
> Using DR with the cache servers on the same network segment as the client
> network is a bit tricky. Not if you only do interception, but if you want
> to provide a proxy address as well (recommended).
> 
> Regards
> Henrik