cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bharat Kumar <bharat.ku...@citrix.com>
Subject Re: [Discuss] Support for multiple ip ranges.
Date Mon, 11 Mar 2013 12:13:06 GMT
Hi Chiradeep,

Thanks for your suggestions. Please find my comments inline.
 
On Mar 9, 2013, at 5:12 AM, Chiradeep Vittal <Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com> wrote:

> We may not need to add another nic on the dhcp server for distinct
> subnets. 
> 
> Since they are on the same physical media, the dnsmasq should see dhcp
> requests from all subnets on that physical media (vlan or untagged vlan).
> Dnsmasq can handle this. See
> https://caffeine-powered.net/tech/networking/dnsmasq-dns-multiple-subnets-a
> nd-static-hosts/
> and 
> http://www.clearfoundation.com/component/option,com_kunena/Itemid,232/catid
> ,28/func,view/id,14979/
> 
> 
> You could just add another virtual interface (eth0:1) without needing any
> hot plug of nics.
> Also this should be necessary only when you add vm with an ip on the new
> subnet. It should not be in the flow of executing this api (which is
> synchronous)

As you suggested we will be crating a new ip alias instead of a new nic.
Also we create the alias when first IP form the new subnet is allocated. 

> 
> I'm guessing there is some change in the logic for assigning a guest or
> management ip address (in order to select from the new subnet / range)

In case if the admin wants to specify the ip that will be allotted to a guest vm he can mention
it as a part of DeployVm API.
currently we don't have any way to do this for management ip addresses. I don't	know the use
case in which this will be required.

> 
> Are you proposing an editpod API? Or are you re-using the updatePod API?
> 

I intend to reuse the update pod command to add the pod IPs . 

> On 3/5/13 4:56 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
>> The FS is confusing. createVlanIpRange is used for shared networks and
>> public networks. There should be separate sections detailing the usecases
>> for basic zone and advanced zone.
>> What about removing ip ranges?
>> Api parameters description, format, range should be provided
>> Error conditions should be described.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 1/25/13 2:54 PM, "Manan Shah" <manan.shah@citrix.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Can you please identify what is being done in the FS? I am still not
>>> clear. For the functionality that already works, are you modifying them?
>>> How are you going to handle management IP Ranges.
>>> 
>>> Please update the FS with your implementation plans. Thanks in advance.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Manan Shah
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 1/25/13 12:46 AM, "Bharat Kumar" <bharat.kumar@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Manan,
>>>> find my answers inline.
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 25, 2013, at 5:22 AM, Manan Shah <manan.shah@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Bharat Kumar,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have some additional questions regarding this spec.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1. Can you specify the scope of your feature? Assuming you are only
>>>>> addressing the Guest IP part and not Management IP part, correct?
>>>>  The scope is both management and guest ip ranges.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2. For the Advanced Shared, I realized after writing these
>>>>> requirements
>>>>> that adding more ranges to the existing subnet for a Shared Network is
>>>>> already possible today. For different subnets, I believe Anthony has
>>>>> taken
>>>>> a different approach which is contradictory to yours. Are you
>>>>> suggesting
>>>>> that we will support both ways?
>>>> I think we should not support two methods to do the same thing.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 3. For Basic Zone, it also seems that this is already possible to
>>>>> extend
>>>>> an existing subnet for the POD. For an additional subnet on the same
>>>>> POD,
>>>>> would this new API work and how different/similar are the approaches
>>>>> going
>>>>> to be compared to Advanced Shared network?
>>>> 
>>>> The plan is to use this API for different subnets also.
>>>> What i mentioned in the functional  spec is one of the ways to do this
>>>> and I am open to new ideas.
>>>> I think before we finalize the approach we should understand the pros
>>>> and
>>>> cons of each of these
>>>> methods and decide on the approach accordingly.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Manan Shah
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 1/19/13 3:08 AM, "Bharat Kumar" <bharat.kumar@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Sanjeev, 
>>>>>> find my comments inline.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:31 PM, Sanjeev Neelarapu
>>>>>> <sanjeev.neelarapu@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have reviews Multiple IP Ranges FS available @
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Multiple+Ip+ra
>>>>>>> n
>>>>>>> g
>>>>>>> es
>>>>>>> +FS and below are my review comments:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1.Is there any limit on no.of subnets/IP ranges that can be added
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> guest?(since a new nic is added on router vm for every different
>>>>>>> subnet)
>>>>>>  There is a limit on the number of nics a VM can have depending on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> hypervisor. So if we go ahead with the present  idea there will be
a
>>>>>> limit on the number of subnets. I also came to know alternative
>>>>>> method,
>>>>>> we can add multiple ips to the same nic of a VM. I still need to
see
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> there are any downsides  to this.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2.Do we support adding multiple subnets in the same vlan incase
of
>>>>>>> Shared guest network in Advanced zone?
>>>>>> I think this can be done as an enhancement once we are done with
the
>>>>>> basic implementation.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 3.Can we shrink the existing IP ranges(Guest/Management)?
>>>>>>    Shrinking an ip range is possible as long as none of the ips
>>>>>> which
>>>>>> are being removed due to shrinkage are in use. We still need to
>>>>>> discuss
>>>>>> if this functionality is required.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 4.Can we add non-contiguos guest ip ranges for Basic zone?
>>>>>>   yes.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 5.Do we support tagged IP Network for management traffic?
>>>>>> I don't  understand this question can you please elaborate it.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 6.Is not-contiguous management IP ranges supported?
>>>>>> yes. 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 7. Is this supported in upgraded environment?
>>>>>> The upgrade will not modify the existing ip ranges. we can just add
>>>>>> new
>>>>>> ip ranges after the upgrade.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Sanjeev
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Bharat Kumar [mailto:bharat.kumar@citrix.com]
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 5:27 PM
>>>>>>> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org;
>>>>>>> cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> Subject: [Discuss] Support for multiple ip ranges.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Currently in cloudstack  we can add multiple public ip ranges.
we
>>>>>>> want
>>>>>>> to provide  similar flexibility  for management  and guest ip
>>>>>>> ranges.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Motivation: There may be cases where some part of the subnet
is
>>>>>>> allocated for some other purpose and the admin wants to use the
rest
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the ip range or admin may want to add more ip address  once the
old
>>>>>>> ones
>>>>>>> are exhausted. Admin may want to  add the ip ranges form the
same
>>>>>>> subnet
>>>>>>> or from different one. Currently in cloudstack there is no
>>>>>>> flexibility
>>>>>>> to do this for management and guest ip ranges (ip ranges from
>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>> subnets). 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This feature allows adding multiple management ip ranges in advanced
>>>>>>> and basic zones,  and guest ip ranges in  basic zones.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Bharat Kumar.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message