4 ms·
Chances are it's IPVS[1], maybe with some patching. Why would one reinvent the wheel when Linux already lets you do that. In that case it would be C since it'
by takeda 9y ago
Chances are it's IPVS[1], maybe with some patching.
Why would one reinvent the wheel when Linux already lets you do that.
In that case it would be C since it's implemented in the Linux kernel.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Virtual_Server https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Virtual_Server
- takeda 9y agoI should have read the blog instead of skimming before responding. This appears as Layer 4 load balancing, IPVS is more of Layer 3. So the person who was voted down by mentioning HAProxy might not be too far off. It could be implemented through HAProxy + TPROXY enabled in the kernel[1]. Then just make sure that default gateway configured on targets routes back to the load balancer or it is the load balancer. [1] https://www.loadbalancer.org/blog/configure-haproxy-with-tproxy-kernel-for-full-transparent-proxy/ https://www.loadbalancer.org/blog/configure-haproxy-with-tpr...
- bogomipz 9y ago>"This appears as Layer 4 load balancing, IPVS is more of Layer 3." No, IPVS is L4 load balancing. L3 load balancing would be a routing protocol plus ECMP.
- takeda 9y agoAh my bad, even the wiki link I posted said it is layer 4. I guess both solutions could be utilized then, perhaps it was IPVS then since it would be more performant than HAProxy.