[openstack-dev] [api][neutron][nova][Openstack-operators][interop] Time for a bikeshed - help me name types of networking

Neil Jerram neil at tigera.io
Mon May 15 14:10:25 UTC 2017

On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 6:02 PM Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> wrote:

> Are "internal" and "external" ok with folks as terms for those two ideas?

Yes, I think so.  Slight worry that 'external' is also used in
'router:external' - but I think it will be clear that your proposed context
is different.

> - External addresses are provided via Fixed IPs
> - External addresses are provided via Floating IPs
> - Internal addresses are provided via Fixed IPs
> - Internal addresses can be provided via Floating IPs

FWIW, I don't think I've ever heard of this last one.

> Anybody have a problem with the key name "network-models"?

No; sounds good.

> What do we call the general concepts represented by fixed and floating
> ips? Do we use the words "fixed" and "floating"? Do we instead try
> something else, such as "direct" and "nat"?
> I have two proposals for the values in our enum:
> #1 - using fixed / floating
> ipv4-external-fixed
> ipv4-external-floating
> ipv4-internal-fixed
> ipv4-internal-floating
> ipv6-fixed
> #2 - using direct / nat
> ipv4-external-direct
> ipv4-external-nat
> ipv4-internal-direct
> ipv4-internal-nat
> ipv6-direct
> Does anyone have strong feelings one way or the other?

Not strong, no.  I feel as though anyone in or close to OpenStack would be
familiar already with the floating and fixed terms - and so why risk the
bother and churn of changing to something else?  But also appreciate that
other clouds do not use those terms.

> My personal preference is direct/nat. "floating" has a tendency to imply
> different things to different people (just watch, we're going to have at
> least one rabbit hole that will be an argument about the meaning of
> floating ips) ... while anyone with a background in IT knows what "nat"
> is. It's also a characteristic from a server/workload perspective that
> is related to a choice the user might want to make:
>   Does the workload need the server to know its own IP?
>   Does the workload prefer to be behind NAT?
>   Does the workload not care and just wants connectivity?
> On the other hand, "direct" isn't exactly a commonly used word in this
> context. I asked a ton of people at the Summit last week and nobody
> could come up with a better term for "IP that is configured inside of
> the server's network stack". "non-natted", "attached", "routed" and
> "normal" were all suggested. I'm not sure any of those are super-great -
> so I'm proposing "direct" - but please if you have a better suggestion
> please make it.

Not sure it's better, but "Internet address space" or something else that
conveys the idea that the address given to the VM is in the same address
space (aka scope) as things outside the cluster.

Regards - Neil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170515/2778c548/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list