incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase 1)
Date Tue, 22 Jan 2013 12:16:37 GMT


On 01/21/2013 08:06 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Wido den Hollander <wido@widodh.nl> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 01/17/2013 04:11 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The first draft of IPv6 FS is available at
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/IPv6+support
>>> now.
>>>
>>> Basically based on our previous discussion, we would like to stick to
>>> dnsmasq, and assume shared network for advance zone in the phase one,
>>> to make thing as simple as possible in phase 1.
>>>
>>> Comments/questions are welcome!
>>>
>>
>> What's the reason for not doing this in basic networking first? Isn't that
>> the easiest one?
>
> And in fact basic network is harder...
>
> For basic network, we would allocate IP address from our pod range ip
> address, which also known as private ip in our system. That make the
> connection between hosts, and would assign the address to SSVM and
> CPVM as well. That's much more complex than advance share network,
> which we would only need to deal with one certain range of public
> network.
>

Since DHCPv6 doesn't support sending out a default gateway you have to 
rely on your own routers sending our Router Advertisements in Basic mode.

When you know the MAC from the Virtual Machine you can calculate the 
IPv6 address if you know the subnet and at least open that in the 
security groups.

Wido

> --Sheng
>>
>> I'm getting the feeling that this implementation will be rushed in by just
>> skipping a lot of things just to get *some* IPv6 in CloudStack.
>>
>> We can't just add IPv6 and say *experimental* because people will start
>> using it.
>>
>> And why is there a need for radvd when using DHCPv6?
>>
>> Wido
>>
>>> --Sheng
>>>
>>

Mime
View raw message