[rt-users] Tricky situation with rt-mailgate
Tuc at Beach House
tuc at tucs-beachin-obx-house.com
Mon May 2 21:14:53 EDT 2005
>
> So you're trying to get the mailgate box to talk to the other two,
> with*out* going through the load-balanced IP address for those boxes,
> right?
>
Right, BUT, also be able to deal with one or the other machine
not being there. (All these requirements, I know!)
>
> > It comes back down to even with a 2nd interface, the load balanced
> > IP is still in the subnet of the first interface.
>
> Yes, but if you *lie* to the mailgate machine, by putting into it's hosts
> file the name of the other machines, as well as their IP address *on
> the other private network* (192.168.2/24, for example, where the load
> balanced interfaces are on 192.168.1/24), then the mailgate machine
> won't *talk* to the load balanced IPs.
>
> In other words, set up a "back" network that the loadbalancer has no
> knowledge of, and force the mail machine to use it.
>
> Was that clearer, and do you think it will serve?
>
Its clearer... I've got to see what it'll take to implement.
Thanks, Tuc
More information about the rt-users
mailing list