From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] netfilter: xtables: add cluster match Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:38:34 +0100 Message-ID: <49808A0A.7050908@netfilter.org> References: <20090128145801.7501.44459.stgit@Decadence> <20090128145848.7501.18129.stgit@Decadence> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, kaber@trash.net To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:42599 "EHLO us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751688AbZA1Qio (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:38:44 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Wednesday 2009-01-28 15:58, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > >> This patch adds the iptables cluster match. This match can be used >> to deploy gateway and back-end load-sharing clusters. Assuming that >> all the nodes see all packets >> (see arptables mcmangle target and PKTTYPE iptables targets on how >> to do that), the cluster match decides if this node has to handle a >> packet given: > > Is not this what CLUSTERIP is essentially supposed to do? No, you can't deploy load-sharing setups for gateways as the -d parameter is mandatory, CLUSTERIP only works for back-end nodes and have a couple of significant problems. Indeed, these stuff supersedes CLUSTERIP. -- "Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers