From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ugo Bellavance Subject: Re: DNAT/NAPT Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:20:44 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20041123195407.GA2891@bender.817west.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20041123195407.GA2891@bender.817west.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org Jason Opperisano wrote: > On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 02:43:56PM -0500, Ugo Bellavance wrote: > >>Hi, >> >> I think that it is possible to achieve some kind of load-balancing >>between two servers using iptables NAPT (Network and port translation, >>which is usually called port forwarding). >> >>I want to run 2 web servers and use my firewall to do some >>load-balancing between them, but I was wondering if it only forwarded >>the packets on some round-robin way, even if one host is down. To >>summarize, I want to know if I can do some automatic failover with iptables. >> >>If you need more info, let me know > > > why not do it for real? > > http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/ Because, in fact, I'll be using trustix firewall and I know it is based on iptables, and I don't want to do the work if it's already been done. I'll check lvs if it doesn't do what I want. Thanks, > > -j > > -- > "That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough. I'm going > to clown college!" > --The Simpsons > >