> so my Question is-->possible without **MASQUERADE** ??.. will the=20
> setup(as shown in docs) loadbalance for our real ip's ??
Short answer: No.
Long answer:
You should first answer the question: what kind of LB do you want? =
Incoming, outgoing or both? If you want incoming only, you don't need =
Julian's patches, nor NAT per s=E9. You can use DNS to balance your =
incoming connections and assing every backend server two IP addresses: =
one from both IP ranges.
If you want outgoing LB, or both:
Julian's patches work when you have more than one IP range, but each IP =
range is going only through one provider, that is: you do not have PI =
address space and do not use BGP4 to announce your routes through =
multiple providers. If you do have PI address space and speak BGP4, you =
don't need Julian's patches nor do you need NAT.
This is probably not your case, and the IP ranges you received from your =
providers are PA, that is they are part of the larger address space of =
your provider. This means that IP range 1 will only come through =
provider 1 and IP range 2 will only flow through provider 2.
Because of this: if you don't use NAT and assign an IP from IP range 1 =
to some machine, the server will never be able to use the link through =
provider 2, because his address is from IP range 1 and will only flow =
through provider 1 (read above). For this to work, you THUS need NAT.
Why don't you want to use NAT? NAT is not dirty. NAT is stable, fast, =
secure and saves you from renumbering your network when you switch =
providers.
Hope this is clear and helps, if not, ask.
Cheers,
Laurens van Alphen
Keen on dots