[openstack-dev] [neutron] [designate] multi-tenancy in Neutron's DNS integration
graham.hayes at hpe.com
Tue May 10 13:30:26 UTC 2016
On 09/05/2016 21:48, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> "Hayes, Graham" <graham.hayes at hpe.com> wrote on 05/09/2016 04:08:07 PM:
> > ...
> > On 09/05/2016 20:55, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> > ...
> > > Oh, right, the network gets to specify the rest of the FQDN. In my
> > > I am interested in Neutron Ports on tenant networks. So with a
> > > "hostname" (first label) and per-network "domain" (rest of the labels),
> > > I would get separation between tenants --- at least in the sense that
> > > there is no overlap in FQDNs. Will this work for private tenant
> > Yes, you could publish the records to Designate for this, or using the
> > internal dns resolution side of the integration.
> > Pushing the records to designate would make them viewable globally
> > (anywhere the DNS servers are accessible)
> > > The other part of separation is that I do not want one tenant to
> even be
> > > able to look up FQDNs that belong to another tenant. Is this
> > > prohibition possible today? If not, is anyone else interested in it?
> > Do you want to limit this to inside the tenant private network? if so,
> > just allowing users to set the dns_domain on a network, and not enabling
> > the external DNS plugin will work fine.
> Ah, that may be what I want. BTW, I am not planning to use Nova. I am
> planning to use Swarm and Kubernetes to create containers attached to
> Neutron private tenant networks. What DNS server would I configure
> those containers to use?
Not sure what happened with that last reply - it seems to have dropped
The DNSMasq instance running on the neutron network would have these
records - they should be sent as part of the DHCP lease, so leaving the
DNS set to automatic should pick them up.
More information about the OpenStack-dev