cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From 丸子良太 / MARUKO,RYOTA <ryota.maruko...@hitachi-solutions.com>
Subject RE: XenServer nested on XenServer
Date Fri, 24 Jun 2016 00:20:39 GMT
Dear Tim, Remi

Thank you for your advices!!
I will try XenServer in KVM(or ESXi).

Regards


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
>Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 1:50 AM
>To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: [!]Re: XenServer nested on XenServer
>
>Hi Tim,
>
>Virtualising XenServer in KVM (and ESXi) works fine. We use it a lot for testing and it
even performs OK (KVM on KVM is
>a faster, but it’s usable). To make things easy, just run everything in one KVM VM (or
connect two openvswitches together
>with virtual patch coards). The bridges will make sure all vlans are available. It’s
fully transparent, no need for complex
>configurations.
>
>Regards, Remi
>
>On 16/06/16 15:38, "Tim Mackey" <tmackey@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Maruko-san,
>>
>>My expectation is even with KVM you'd experience similar problems. Assuming
>>KVM will virtualize XenServer (not something I'm aware of it being a
>>working configuration), you'd still have the networking problems to
>>address. Paul can confirm, but to the best of my knowledge, the only
>>hypervisor with a virtual switch which properly supports trunking is
>>vSphere Enterprise Plus (and may require Cisco Nexus 1000v). I am aware of
>>people nesting XenServer in vSphere for training purposes, but the
>>performance is low (iirc nested vSphere emulates some of the hypervisor
>>calls rather than using pure hardware).
>>
>>-tim
>>
>>On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:37 PM, 丸子良太 / MARUKO,RYOTA <
>>ryota.maruko.fd@hitachi-solutions.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Paul, Tim
>>>
>>> Thank you for your answer.
>>>
>>> It can run on the "NO" nested XenServer with some physical server and
>>> physical switch.
>>> My goal was to build an easy test environment,
>>> And to be prepared in fewer resources
>>> (1 phisical Management Server and some hypervisor on 1 phisical
>>> hypervisor).
>>>
>>> So take the time I think I will give up....
>>> Last question!!
>>> Will I be able to construct "XenServer nested on KVM"???
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From: Tim Mackey [mailto:tmackey@gmail.com]
>>> >Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 10:39 PM
>>> >To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> >Subject: [!]Re: XenServer nested on XenServer
>>> >
>>> >Maruko-san,
>>> >
>>> >The problem is that you're using advanced networking. Advanced networking
>>> >requires the physical switch to have its switch ports trunked. When you
>>> run
>>> >a nested XenServer, that physical switch becomes the *virtual* switch of
>>> >the XenServer. While I believe it is possible to configure the virtual
>>> >switch to allow a given virtual switch port to run in a trunked mode, the
>>> >XenServer api isn't coded to allow for this.
>>> >
>>> >What this means is that in order to make your configuration function,
>>> >you're going to need to determine a number of things (XenServer vif and
>>> pif
>>> >ports), and then directly configure the ovs (open virtual switch) to allow
>>> >trunked operations for your VLANs. Complicating matters is that you'll
>>> need
>>> >to do this both on every host in the pool, but also at each server
>>> restart.
>>> >The latter is due to the vif port on the ovs being different as each VM
>>> >boots, and a reboot will change that port (even though the vif remains the
>>> >same).
>>> >
>>> >I *think* MAC forwarding will work properly, so I'd suggest trying to use
>>> >basic networking.
>>> >
>>> >btw, what I outlined for the advanced networking is very much "unsupported
>>> >by Citrix" at this time
>>> >
>>> >-tim
>>> >
>>> >On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Paul Angus <paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
>>> >wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi Ryota,
>>> >>
>>> >> A lot here depends on the 'outside' XenServer's openvswiches ability
to
>>> >> pass traffic to a MAC that it can't see. And with the trunking of VLANs
>>> >> The first test I would do is migrate the UserVM to XenServer01-002.
If
>>> >> they can communicate then your issue is with the outer networking.
>>> >>
>>> >> Tim and Remi may know more about bending XenServer networking to your
>>> >> will, but from my general experience:
>>> >>
>>> >> You many well need to configure your outer XenServer (XenServer01) to
>>> use
>>> >> promiscuous mode on any interfaces which the nested XenServers use.
>>> >> http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX121729
>>> >> and
>>> >> you'll need to ensure that tagged VLANs are passed through the guest
>>> >> interfaces on the parent XenServer (XenServer01) as XenServer01-002
will
>>> >> tag traffic with VLAN x,y,z (guest VLAN) which needs to be retained
and
>>> >> passed to XenServer01-003 - I don't know how to do that for a
>>> XenServer...:(
>>> >>
>>> >> there is also an experimental setting for nested XenServers:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> https://justus.berlin/2015/07/nested-virtualization-in-citrix-xenserver-6-5-sp1/
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Kind regards,
>>> >>
>>> >> Paul Angus
>>> >>
>>> >> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>>> >> www.shapeblue.com
>>> >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
>>> >> @shapeblue
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>> >> From: 丸子良太 / MARUKO,RYOTA [mailto:ryota.maruko.fd@hitachi-solutions.com
>>> ]
>>> >> Sent: 15 June 2016 09:57
>>> >> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> >> Subject: RE: XenServer nested on XenServer
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear Paul&Remi&Tim
>>> >>
>>> >> My networking is as follows.
>>> >>
>>> >> The zone is Advanced mode.
>>> >> I made 3 XenServers as XenServer01-001/002/003 on XenServer01.
>>> >> And I could add the 3 hosts to CloudStack.
>>> >> SSVM and CPVM started in XenServer01-001.
>>> >> So, I could deploy UserVM in XenServer01-002 and VR(DHCP) in
>>> >> XenServer01-003.
>>> >>
>>> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> >> ManagementServer(172.168.100.110)
>>> >> |
>>> >> |
>>> >> (PhysicalNetwork)
>>> >> |
>>> >> |
>>> >> XenServer01(172.168.100.100)
>>> >>   ------------------------------------
>>> >>    XenServer01-001(172.168.100.101)  <--SSVM/CPVM
>>> >>    XenServer01-002(172.168.100.102)  <--VR(DHCP)
>>> >>    XenServer01-003(172.168.100.103)  <--UserVM
>>> >>   ------------------------------------
>>> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> But, it could not access between the UserVM and the VR.
>>> >> I wander if VLAN is not granted because of the nested XenServer.
>>> >>
>>> >> ~~~~~~~~~~
>>> >> VR -OK-> XenServer01-002 -OK-> XenServer01 -NG??-> XenServer01-003
-->
>>> >> UserVM ~~~~~~~~~~
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >> >From: 丸子良太 / MARUKO,RYOTA
>>> >> >[mailto:ryota.maruko.fd@hitachi-solutions.com]
>>> >> >Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2016 5:42 PM
>>> >> >To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> >> >Subject: RE: XenServer nested on XenServer
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Hi, Paul&Remi&Tim
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Thank you for your e-mail.
>>> >> >And I will write the details of my networking.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Please wait for my e-mail.
>>> >> >(English is too difficult for me(^^))
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Regards
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>-----Original Message-----
>>> >> >>From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
>>> >> >>Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2016 4:27 PM
>>> >> >>To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> >> >>Subject: Re: XenServer nested on XenServer
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>Hi Paul,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>I don’t get it but that’s probably me :-) Never mind.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>Regards,
>>> >> >>Remi
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>On 13/06/16 16:00, "Paul Angus" <paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>>Remi,
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>I think asking for the details for Maruko San's networking
in order
>>> >> >>>to give him (hopefully) useful specific help covered
>>> >> >>that part.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>Haters gonna hate.
>>> >> >>>Paul Angus
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>>> >> >>>www.shapeblue.com
>>> >> >>>53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>-----Original Message-----
>>> >> >>>From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
>>> >> >>>Sent: 13 June 2016 14:26
>>> >> >>>To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> >> >>>Subject: Re: XenServer nested on XenServer
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>I kinda like shameless self-plugs although I fail to see
how this one
>>> >> answers the question asked?
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>On 13/06/16 14:09, "Paul Angus" <paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>>Hi Maruko San
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>We'd need to see the details of your networking.
>>> >> >>>>We've created Trillian   github.com/shapeblue/Trillian
- it's based
>>> >> on ESXi and uses CloudStack to orchestrate
>>> >> >everything.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>Kind regards,
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>Paul Angus
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>>> >> >>>>www.shapeblue.com
>>> >> >>>>53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>-----Original Message-----
>>> >> >>>>From: 丸子良太 / MARUKO,RYOTA
>>> >> >>>>[mailto:ryota.maruko.fd@hitachi-solutions.com]
>>> >> >>>>Sent: 13 June 2016 07:53
>>> >> >>>>To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> >> >>>>Subject: XenServer nested on XenServer
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>Hi
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>I tried to create XenServer nested on XenServer for
CloudStack.
>>> >> >>>>It is success to create XenServer nested on XenServer,
And
>>> CloudStack
>>> >> Manager create the system VMs.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>But VR could not access the user VMs.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>Please tell me about the problem.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>Regards
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>

Mime
View raw message