On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Sven Wegener <sven.wegener@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> He :) Imagine an old kernel on the backup receiving new messages and >> not understanding them. How could we at least handle that situation >> gracefully (without totally confusing the older kernel)? We'd need to >> do it in a way that old features are still communicated in the same >> way. E.g., v4-only connection syncs still use the same message format, >> but once you use v6 entries, an unused flag or the 'reserved' field in >> ip_vs_sync_conn is used. A v6 message would still confuse an older >> kernel then, but a user would already notice that ipvsadm can't >> configure the v6 services on the older kernel, so that's not too bad. > > If that's a problem, we can easily change the communication port and even > completely redesign the protocol this way, without having old kernels > getting confused about the data they get. We might lose the ability to > sync between different versions, but in the end this is just the > connection synchronziation and both systems should be running the same > version. We could also keep the old communication port for some time, if > that's really needed. Yes, starting from scratch on another port sounds like a good idea. Losing sync ability totally isn't as bad as confusing an older kernel with new messages, so I hope it's not necessary to keep the old baggage around? Is there enough motivation for doing this though before having a cleaned-up minimal v6 version without the sync daemon? This is where I'm currently a bit stuck with... any help is appreciated :) Julius -- Google Switzerland GmbH -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
