cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Nalley <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] EIP across zones
Date Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:53:38 GMT
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:11 AM, Murali Reddy <> wrote:
> On 01/04/13 1:47 AM, "David Nalley" <> wrote:
>>On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Murali Reddy <>
>>> On 26/03/13 8:10 PM, "Adam Grochowski" <>
>>>>So I'm curious - what is the proposed method to move a single IP
>>>>across zones (presuming these zones span regions).  As Chiradeep
>>>>mentioned earlier, /24 is the largest block that will be advertised,
>>>>so it would necessitate moving (or advertising in two locations, and
>>>>back hauling back to one)  an entire class C to accomplish this (or
>>>>some black magic like LISP).
>>> Adam, there is no proposed method to move IP across the zones. Having a
>>> native capability in CloudStack to move IP across the zones does not
>>> sense. We will be just assuming CloudStack will have control to many
>>> infrastructure components (orchestrate route advertisements etc).
>>> what is being proposed is, let the CloudStack raise an event when user
>>> moves IP across the zones, then let admin act up on the event and
>>> the IP availability from new zone. There is no assumption or proposed
>>> method when and how admin to achieve this. Operator can opt for any
>>> solution that works in distributed data centre setup.
>>You don't have a proposed method for moving IPs between zones?
>>Is this all a theoretical solution?
> No, its not theoretical solution. Point I am trying to make is, CloudStack
> need not have a native capability to move IP across zone. From the
> CloudStack core perspective, all we need is abstraction of moving IP
> (presented as NAT) across the zones. Then we can have specific
> intelligence in the plug-ins which are providing EIP service. For
> e.g.'Route Health Injection' is commonly used solution in distributed data
> centres for disaster recovery supported by multiple vendors [1][2][3][4].
> My initial plan was to enhance NetScaler plug-in to integrate with
> NetScaler's RHI capability. But even to have such capability in plug-in
> means CloudStack will have to make several assumptions on operational
> aspects. So its better to off-load responsibility of IP advertisement to
> the operators. Let me know if you still have any confusion. May be I will
> add a reference deployment model/s once I progress with feature and test
> it.

Ahh - very helpful - thank you.
A reference deployment model would be nice as well.


View raw message