Mailing-List: contact users-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <36B489B1C8BF3343861C7F6B8F957D4C018F0CBF@GSjpTK1DCembx13.service.hitachi.net>
References: <36B489B1C8BF3343861C7F6B8F957D4C018EF988@GSjpTK1DCembx13.service.hitachi.net>
 <HE1PR07MB1401A642E969E6EF5FC6DB438C530@HE1PR07MB1401.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
 <996876BA-5AB8-45EF-8395-CFC046DADD3A@schubergphilis.com> <HE1PR07MB14016852194FD589EFFF0A2C8C530@HE1PR07MB1401.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
 <66A289BC-7A6E-4AFD-9919-94A4C29D736A@schubergphilis.com> <36B489B1C8BF3343861C7F6B8F957D4C018F0036@GSjpTK1DCembx13.service.hitachi.net>
 <36B489B1C8BF3343861C7F6B8F957D4C018F06BF@GSjpTK1DCembx13.service.hitachi.net>
 <HE1PR07MB1401E403CC1263F92AE619368C550@HE1PR07MB1401.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAJGXtBPv+V-NsKurGUrRmW7YkVKxoh8uB0gk0BNWWo8fhu_C6g@mail.gmail.com> <36B489B1C8BF3343861C7F6B8F957D4C018F0CBF@GSjpTK1DCembx13.service.hitachi.net>
From: Tim Mackey <tmackey@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:38:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJGXtBNj-y-iFL6ngqJh+XnA9fRLcxb23+uNXEPRee01Z22MtA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Re: XenServer nested on XenServer
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e60a46d1f880535655be7
archived-at: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:38:52 -0000

--001a114e60a46d1f880535655be7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

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, =E4=B8=B8=E5=AD=90=E8=89=AF=E5=A4=AA / MA=
RUKO=EF=BC=8CRYOTA <
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 networkin=
g
> >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, th=
e
> >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 all=
ow
> >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 t=
he
> >same).
> >
> >I *think* MAC forwarding will work properly, so I'd suggest trying to us=
e
> >basic networking.
> >
> >btw, what I outlined for the advanced networking is very much "unsupport=
ed
> >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 t=
o
> >> pass traffic to a MAC that it can't see. And with the trunking of VLAN=
s
> >> 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 wi=
ll
> >> tag traffic with VLAN x,y,z (guest VLAN) which needs to be retained an=
d
> >> 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: =E4=B8=B8=E5=AD=90=E8=89=AF=E5=A4=AA / MARUKO=EF=BC=8CRYOTA [mai=
lto: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: =E4=B8=B8=E5=AD=90=E8=89=AF=E5=A4=AA / MARUKO=EF=BC=8CRYOTA
> >> >[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=E2=80=99t get it but that=E2=80=99s 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 o=
ne
> >> 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 base=
d
> >> 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: =E4=B8=B8=E5=AD=90=E8=89=AF=E5=A4=AA / MARUKO=EF=BC=8CRYOTA
> >> >>>>[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
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >>
> >>
>

--001a114e60a46d1f880535655be7--