cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeffrey McGovern <jeffrey.mcgov...@sungard.com>
Subject Re: Configuring static routes on VM
Date Fri, 08 Feb 2013 19:07:55 GMT
Hey Hugo,
Thanks for the reply. At the moment we are still evaluating technologies
but Nicira is one of them.



Jeffrey S. McGovern
SunGard Availability Services
401 N. Broad Street - Mezzanine
Philadelphia, PA 19108
Desk: 215-446-2722
Fax: 215-408-4700
jeffrey.mcgovern@sungard.com


On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Hugo Trippaers <
HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com> wrote:

> Not at all.
>
> He is raising a valid point. The current code is actively rejecting
> external elements for vpcs. I'm already working on a fix for that as we
> want to use our Nicira stuff with vpc as well. It looks like its a trivial
> fix, as it used to work before this restriction was put in.
>
> There are also some dependencies on vlans that I might have to remove or
> workaround. As soon as I got packaging fixed for the 4.1 branch this is
> next on my list. There is already some code in a branch for this, but I
> haven't been able to test it yet due to time constraints.
>
> Which overlay networks are you intending to use? I can make sure to test
> with that as well.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
>
>
> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
>
> Op 7 feb. 2013 om 23:00 heeft "Chip Childers" <chip.childers@sungard.com>
> het volgende geschreven:
>
> > Hugo - Mind taking a look at the questions that Jeff has?
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 04:53:19PM -0500, Jeffrey McGovern wrote:
> >> So after more research I found this
> >> article<https://cwiki.apache.org/CLOUDSTACK/inter-vlan-routing.html>
> >> which
> >> is where we are trying to get to in terms of our network design.  As I
> was
> >> reading through the Inter-VLAN routing link it mentions the following:
> >>
> >> "In vpcOffering you define which services you want to support in the
> VPC.
> >> When new Guest network is added to the VPC, we should check if its set
> of
> >> services/providers are within VPC service/providers list. As
> >> sourceNatService is required by the VPC, even when its not specified in
> >> serviceProviders list, we add it automatically (with the
> VpcVirtualRouter
> >> provider). Only VpcVirtualRouter can play a provider role inside the
> VPC."
> >>
> >>
> >> I have an additional question which is if we intend to use an overlay
> >> network and the overlay vendor is implemented as a network service
> provider
> >> can we use the overlay in conjunction with the VpcVirtualRouter even
> though
> >> the last line of the above quote states: Only VpcVirtualRouter can play
> a
> >> provider role inside the VPC?
> >>
> >>
> >> The source of my confusion comes from slide 12 - 16 of this
> >> deck<http://www.slideshare.net/hugotrippaers/cloudstack-nvp-integration
> >
> >> where
> >> Nicira appears to be implemented as a Service Provider which would
> appear
> >> to not allow the two to coexist.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Jeffrey S. McGovern
> >> SunGard Availability Services
> >> 401 N. Broad Street - Mezzanine
> >> Philadelphia, PA 19108
> >> Desk: 215-446-2722
> >> Fax: 215-408-4700
> >> jeffrey.mcgovern@sungard.com
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Jeffrey McGovern <
> >> jeffrey.mcgovern@sungard.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Geoff,
> >>> Kinda sort of what I am looking for but can you help me understand this
> >>> statement taken from
> >>>
> http://incubator.apache.org/cloudstack/docs/en-US/Apache_CloudStack/4.0.0-incubating/html/Installation_Guide/configure-vpc.html#add-gateway-vpc
> >>> ?
> >>>
> >>> "A private gateway can be added by the root admin only. The VPC private
> >>> network has 1:1 relationship with the NIC of the physical network. No
> >>> gateways with duplicated VLAN and IP are allowed in the same data
> center.?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Given a multi-tenant environment does this actually imply that this
> >>> network must be bound to a physical interface? Or does this mean that
> there
> >>> must be a physical interface dedicated to this type of traffic which
> can
> >>> then be carved up among multiple tenants based on the providers model?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jeffrey S. McGovern
> >>> SunGard Availability Services
> >>> 401 N. Broad Street - Mezzanine
> >>> Philadelphia, PA 19108
> >>> Desk: 215-446-2722
> >>> Fax: 215-408-4700
> >>> jeffrey.mcgovern@sungard.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Geoff Higginbottom <
> >>> geoff.higginbottom@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Jeff,
> >>>>
> >>>> If I have interpreted your requirements correctly, you want to send
> >>>> traffic from the Guest Instances to a network which is probably
> within the
> >>>> Data Centre and not on the internet.  The Default Gateway for the
> Guest VMs
> >>>> is the VPC Virtual Router, and the Gateway used by the VPC Virtual
> Router,
> >>>> is the Public Network Gateway.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you want to direct traffic destined for a particular CIDR, you can
> >>>> configure the VPC Virtual Router to route the traffic via a different
> >>>> Gateway by using the 'Private Gateway' feature.
> >>>>
> >>>> Imagine you have a set of physical servers running in the same DC,
> create
> >>>> a VPC Private Gateway, and then create the Routing Rules for the
> required
> >>>> CIDR, specifying the alternate Gateway IP which has L3 connectivity
> to the
> >>>> physical servers.  This will add a new Virtual Interface onto the VPC
> >>>> Virtual Router, and create the routes so traffic is sent via the
> alternate
> >>>> Gateway rather than the Public Network Gateway.  You will obviously
> need to
> >>>> update the routing rules on alternate gateway so the traffic can flow
> back
> >>>> to the Guest VMs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards
> >>>>
> >>>> Geoff Higginbottom
> >>>>
> >>>> D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581
> >>>>
> >>>> geoff.higginbottom@shapeblue.com
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> >>>> Sent: 05 February 2013 19:12
> >>>> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: Re: Configuring static routes on VM
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 10:47:15AM -0800, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
> >>>>> We could enhance the CloudStack API to support DHCP options per
> subnet.
> >>>>> One DHCP option could be static routes.
> >>>>
> >>>> +1 to that...  Jeff, want to open a feature request [1] for this?
> >>>>
> >>>> -chip
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 2/5/13 10:06 AM, "Chris Sears" <chris.x.sears@sungard.com>
wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Jeff,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> CloudStack currently does all in-guest network configuration
via
> DHCP
> >>>>>> and, as far as I can tell, no DHCP options are being set that
would
> >>>>>> push static routes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you have a VM with multiple NICs, the DHCP server will hand
out
> >>>>>> IPs to each of them, while trying not to confuse the guest about
the
> >>>>>> default gateway. In an earlier discussion, it was mentioned
that
> this
> >>>>>> can be challenging due to differences in DHCP client of each
guest
> OS:
> >>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/a5nwds7emxxix3ux
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Chris
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Chip Childers
> >>>>>> <chip.childers@sungard.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Jeffrey McGovern
> >>>>>>> <jeffrey.mcgovern@sungard.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>> I was wondering if there is a way to configure static
routes on a
> >>>>>>>> guest VM  after it has been provisioned via Cloudstack?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Jeff,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It may help if you provide a little more context to the
question to
> >>>>>>> help folks understand what you're looking to do.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -chip
> >>>>
> >>>> ShapeBlue provides a range of strategic and technical consulting and
> >>>> implementation services to help IT Service Providers and Enterprises
> to
> >>>> build a true IaaS compute cloud. ShapeBlue’s expertise, combined with
> >>>> CloudStack technology, allows IT Service Providers and Enterprises to
> >>>> deliver true, utility based, IaaS to the customer or end-user.
> >>>>
> >>>> ________________________________
> >>>>
> >>>> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are
> intended
> >>>> solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
> views or
> >>>> opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
> necessarily
> >>>> represent those of Shape Blue Ltd. If you are not the intended
> recipient of
> >>>> this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents,
> nor
> >>>> copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe
> you
> >>>> have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company
> incorporated
> >>>> in England & Wales.
> >>>
> >>>
>
>

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