cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase 1)
Date Thu, 17 Jan 2013 21:06:33 GMT
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Alex Huang <Alex.Huang@citrix.com> wrote:
> Sheng,
>
> Can you add in that SG does not support IPv6?  Make sure everyone knows that.
>

Added in FS.

--Sheng

> --Alex
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sheng@yasker.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 11:58 AM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase 1)
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Sheng Yang <sheng@yasker.org> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Anthony Xu <Xuefei.Xu@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> More comments,
>> >>
>> >> Can VM access VM by name on IPv6 network( router VM provide DNS
>> service ?)?
>> >
>> > Yes, dnsmasq would provide AAAA records.
>> >
>> >> Is password-reset service supported on IPv6 network?
>> >
>> > Should be in the future, but not phase 1, which only provide DNS and DHCP.
>> >
>> >> Is meta-data and user-data service supported on IPv6 network?
>> >
>> > Not phase 1.
>> >
>> >> Is external network device (F5, SRX) supported on IPv6 network?
>> >
>> > Not in the plan.
>> >
>> >> What's the impact for Security enabled shared network?
>> >
>> > Not in the plan. Only support shared network without SG in the phase 1.
>> >
>> >> What's the impact for multiple IPs per NIC?
>> >
>> > I guess we may no longer need to have another nic for different public
>> > subnet, but need to be confirmed.
>>
>> So I would update the systemvm first, adding the newer version of
>> dnsmasq and radvd.
>>
>> Does anyone has specific suggestion on which version to be used? I can
>> get the dnsmasq from debian testing repo and it works for me. Radvd
>> can be get from debian stable repo, but I assume it maybe kind of old.
>>
>> --Sheng
>> >
>> > --Sheng
>> >>
>> >> Anthony
>> >>
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sheng@yasker.org]
>> >>> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 10:26 AM
>> >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase 1)
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Anthony Xu <Xuefei.Xu@citrix.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > My misunderstanding, I thought that's the link-local ip in Xenserver
>> >>> or KVM:-)
>> >>> >
>> >>> > If a VM is on both IPv6 and IPv4 network, what's the link-local
>> >>> address? IPv4? IPv6? Both?
>> >>>
>> >>> For dual stack case, we still require IPv6 link-local address only.
>> >>>
>> >>> --Sheng
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Anthony
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> >> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sheng@yasker.org]
>> >>> >> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 10:13 AM
>> >>> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >>> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase
1)
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Anthony Xu <Xuefei.Xu@citrix.com>
>> >>> >> wrote:
>> >>> >> > Thanks for the write-up,
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > One comment,
>> >>> >> > Is there any reason not use link-local IPv4 address?
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >>*User VM would have one link-local IPv6 address
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> IPv6 required one auto configured link local address per nic(means
>> >>> >> likely one nic would have more than one IP address, and in
the
>> >>> >> different subnet), and the link local address would be used
to send
>> >>> >> out DHCP request etc(http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3315). It's
also
>> >>> >> the basic of Neighbor discovery mechanism in
>> >>> >> IPv6(http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4861).
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I think IPv4 link-local is less relevant in this case...
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> --Sheng
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> >> >> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sheng@yasker.org]
>> >>> >> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 7:11 PM
>> >>> >> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >>> >> >> Subject: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase
1)
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Hi,
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> The first draft of IPv6 FS is available at
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/IPv6+support
>> >>> >> >> now.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Basically based on our previous discussion, we would
like to
>> >>> stick
>> >>> >> to
>> >>> >> >> dnsmasq, and assume shared network for advance zone
in the
>> phase
>> >>> one,
>> >>> >> >> to make thing as simple as possible in phase 1.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Comments/questions are welcome!
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> --Sheng

Mime
View raw message