cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrija Panic <andrija.pa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: help/advise needed: Private gateway vs. new physcial network issue
Date Wed, 03 May 2017 21:34:32 GMT
Ok, thanks, I need to read a bit on tagging networks, first time I
encounter this.

agent.properties only has 1 guest interface definition (
guest.network.device=bond0.950), so I will see how this behaves...

Thanks for input Simon

On 3 May 2017 at 23:19, Simon Weller <sweller@ena.com> wrote:

> We deploy with 2 physical interfaces. 1 is for vxlan guest networks and
> the other is a trunk interfaces for public, mgmt and private gateways. We
> found that tagging was necessary, or the incorrect interface can be
> selected because both have guest networks.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Andrija Panic <andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 4:09 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: help/advise needed: Private gateway vs. new physcial network
> issue
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> not at all. We use tags only for storage and compute(service)/disk
> offerings...
>
> But,
>
> I just found out, even when I change recird in DB record, change KVM label
> from bond0.950 to bond0, then disable/enable zone, and even restart mgmt
> servers, still ACS provision vlan 999 on top of bond0.950 although I
> selected bond0.
>
>
> Her is funny thing: when I changed agent.properties
> file guest.network.device=bond0.950 to bond0, then it worked (at least
> proper PIF selected)...but again this can't be done on production in my
> case
>
> It would be interesting to know (Cloudops and others) if you guys use same
> physical network to carrrie guest private networks (vlans or vxlans?) AND
> these new vlans for PRIV.GTW. We use vxlans gor guest traffic...
>
>
> Thanks Simon,
>
> Andrija
>
> On 3 May 2017 at 23:01, Simon Weller <sweller@ena.com> wrote:
>
> > Andrija,
> >
> >
> > Do you have any network tagging setup for your vpc network offerings that
> > correspond to your zone network tags?
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Andrija Panic <andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 3:46 PM
> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: help/advise needed: Private gateway vs. new physcial network
> issue
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm trying to to test Private Gateway on our production (actually on DEV
> > first :) ) setup, of ACS 4.5,
> > but I'm hitting some strange issues during actual creation of PV GTW.
> >
> > My setup is the following:
> >
> > ACS 4.5, advanced zone KVM (ubuntu 14)
> > mgmt network: KVM label/name: cloudbr0
> > sec. stor.network KMV label/name: cloudbr2
> > guest network KVM label/name: bond0.950 (we use vxlans, so this is
> > apropriate...)
> > public network KVM label/name: cloudbr3
> >
> > This above is all fine, but when adding PRIV.GTW, ACS tries to provision
> > new vlan interface (later with bridge...) on top of selected physical
> > interface (from the list above) - which in my case is impossible, as it
> > seems.
> >
> > So I decided to add addional Physical Network (name: bond0), so I expect
> > ACS will provision i.e. bond0.999 vlan interface for one PRIV.GTW for
> > testing purposes (vlan 999)
> >
> > PROBLEM:
> > - in running zone, I need to disable it, then I use CloudMonkey to add
> > zone:
> > * create physicalnetwork name=bond0 broadcastdomainrange=zone
> > zoneid=d27f6354-a715-40c7-8322-a31091f97699 isolationmethod=vlan
> > Afterwards I do enable the zone: update physicalnetwork state=Enabled
> > id=3424e392-e0a1-4c21-81d9-db69acbe6c8e
> >
> > First command above, does NOT update DB table
> > cloud.physical_network_isolation_methods
> > with new record, so when you list network it dont mentions
> > isolation_method.
> > OK, I edit DB directly, and create new row referencing new network by ID,
> > and vlan set as isolation method.
> >
> > BTW, table cloud.physical_network_traffic_types is not populated, which
> I
> > assume is OK/good since I don't want any normal traffci
> > (mgmt/guest.public/storage) to go over this physical net - but again this
> > might be the root of problems ? Since the only guest network is on PIF
> > bond0.950
> >
> > When I try to create PRIV.GTW, ACS does some magic, and again tries to
> > provision vlan 999 interface (example vlan from above) on bond0.950
> (guest
> > network) (bond0.950.999)
> >
> > I checked the logs (attached below) and it does trie to provision GTW on
> > new physical network really.
> >
> > I'm assuming, that maybe since no values for new bond0 network inside
> table
> > cloud.physical_network_traffic_types is populated, that than ACS fails
> > back
> > to only available guest network, and that is bond0.950 - also I recall we
> > need to define KVM label so the ACS will actaully know on which interface
> > to use... (which is missing from DB for new bond0 network, as
> explained...)
> >
> > I checked the logs, and didn't see any intersting stuff really (perhaps
> I'm
> > missing something...)
> > https://pastebin.com/MZXrK31M
> [https://pastebin.com/i/facebook.png]<https://pastebin.com/MZXrK31M>
>
> PRIV.GTW created on wrong PIF - Pastebin.com<https://pastebin.com/MZXrK31M
> >
> pastebin.com
>
>
>
> > [https://pastebin.com/i/facebook.png]<https://pastebin.com/MZXrK31M>
> >
> > PRIV.GTW created on wrong PIF - Pastebin.com<https://pastebin.
> com/MZXrK31M
> > >
> > pastebin.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I would really appreciate any help, since I dont know which direction to
> go
> > now...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Andrija Panić
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>



-- 

Andrija Panić

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message