<div dir="ltr">Hi,<div>I'm agree with Pablo. We've looked at Neutron resource reservations some time ago.<br>But we can't decide which resources should be reserved and this question has been delayed.</div></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><font color="#888888"><div dir="ltr"><div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><p style="font-size:small;margin:0px;font-family:Helvetica">
</p><p style="font-size:small;margin:0px;font-family:Helvetica"><b><u> </u></b></p><p style="font-size:small;margin:0px;font-family:Helvetica">Nikolay Starodubtsev<br></p><p style="font-size:small;margin:0px;font-family:Helvetica">
Software Engineer</p><p style="font-size:small;margin:0px;font-family:Helvetica">
Mirantis Inc.<br></p><p style="font-size:small;margin:0px;font-family:Helvetica"><br></p><p style="font-size:small;margin:0px;font-family:Helvetica">Skype: dark_harlequi<font color="#888888">ne1</font><br></p></div></div>
</font></div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2014-05-22 10:00 GMT-07:00 Fuente, Pablo A <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pablo.a.fuente@intel.com" target="_blank">pablo.a.fuente@intel.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi,<br>
I'm part of a project that aims to manage Reservations on OpenStack.<br>
Maybe this could be implemented on it. The name of the project is Blazar<br>
(ex Climate). Currently we have two reservation plugins: one for<br>
physical host reservations and other for virtual instances reservation.<br>
We are planning to implement some new plugins: volume reservation and<br>
neutron resource reservation. For the later we are still analyzing which<br>
resources reserve, but from this email seems that fixed IP should be one<br>
of them. Of course we already have implemented all the things needed to<br>
handle reservations in our core code: reservation life cycle, leases<br>
states (under review), notifications (using oslo), pluging mechanism for<br>
new resource reservations, DB schema with alembic migrations, REST API<br>
(with Pecan), etc. And yes, should be easy to try Blazar using our<br>
Devstack integration.<br>
If you need more information about the project please visit our wiki<br>
[1] or send me an email.<br>
<br>
Pablo.<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Climate" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Climate</a><br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 23:51 +0100, Salvatore Orlando wrote:<br>
> In principle there is nothing that should prevent us from implementing<br>
> an IP reservation mechanism.<br>
><br>
><br>
> As with anything, the first thing to check is literature or "related<br>
> work"! If any other IaaS system is implementing such a mechanism, is<br>
> it exposed through the API somehow?<br>
> Also this feature is likely to be provided by IPAM systems. If yes,<br>
> what constructs do they use?<br>
> I do not have the answers to this questions, but I'll try to document<br>
> myself; if you have them - please post them here.<br>
><br>
><br>
> This new feature would probably be baked into neutron's IPAM logic.<br>
> When allocating an IP, first check from within the IP reservation<br>
> pool, and then if it's not found check from standard allocation pools<br>
> (this has non negligible impact on availability ranges management, but<br>
> these are implementation details).<br>
> Aspects to consider, requirement-wise, are:<br>
> 1) Should reservations also be classified by "qualification" of the<br>
> port? For instance, is it important to specify that an IP should be<br>
> used for the gateway port rather than for a floating IP port?<br>
> 2) Are reservations something that an admin could specify on a<br>
> tenant-basis (hence an admin API extension), or an implicit mechanism<br>
> that can be tuned using configuration variables (for instance create<br>
> an IP reservation a for gateway port for a given tenant when a router<br>
> gateway is set).<br>
><br>
><br>
> I apologise if these questions are dumb. I'm just trying to frame this<br>
> discussion into something which could then possibly lead to submitting<br>
> a specification.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Salvatore<br>
><br>
><br>
> On 21 May 2014 21:37, Collins, Sean <<a href="mailto:Sean_Collins2@cable.comcast.com">Sean_Collins2@cable.comcast.com</a>><br>
> wrote:<br>
> (Edited the subject since a lot of people filter based on the<br>
> subject<br>
> line)<br>
><br>
> I would also be interested in reserved IPs - since we do not<br>
> deploy the<br>
> layer 3 agent and use the provider networking extension and a<br>
> hardware<br>
> router.<br>
><br>
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 03:46:53PM EDT, Sławek Kapłoński<br>
> wrote:<br>
> > Hello,<br>
> ><br>
> > Ok, I found that now there is probably no such feature to<br>
> reserve fixed<br>
> > ip for tenant. So I was thinking about add such feature to<br>
> neutron. I<br>
> > mean that it should have new table with reserved ips in<br>
> neutron<br>
> > database and neutron will check this table every time when<br>
> new port<br>
> > will be created (or updated) and IP should be associated<br>
> with this<br>
> > port. If user has got reserved IP it should be then used for<br>
> new port,<br>
> > if IP is reserver by other tenant - it shouldn't be used.<br>
> > What You are thinking about such possibility? Is it possible<br>
> to add it<br>
> > in some future release of neutron?<br>
> ><br>
> > --<br>
> > Best regards<br>
> > Sławek Kapłoński<br>
> > <a href="mailto:slawek@kaplonski.pl">slawek@kaplonski.pl</a><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Dnia Mon, 19 May 2014 20:07:43 +0200<br>
> > Sławek Kapłoński <<a href="mailto:slawek@kaplonski.pl">slawek@kaplonski.pl</a>> napisał:<br>
> ><br>
> > > Hello,<br>
> > ><br>
> > > I'm using openstack with neutron and ML2 plugin. Is there<br>
> any way to<br>
> > > reserve fixed IP from shared external network for one<br>
> tenant? I know<br>
> > > that there is possibility to create port with IP and later<br>
> connect VM<br>
> > > to this port. This solution is almost ok for me but<br>
> problem is when<br>
> > > user delete this instance - then port is also deleted and<br>
> it is not<br>
> > > reserved still for the same user and tenant. So maybe<br>
> there is any<br>
> > > solution to reserve it "permanent"?<br>
> > > I know also about floating IPs but I don't use L3 agents<br>
> so this is<br>
> > > probably not for me :)<br>
> > ><br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
> ><br>
> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Sean M. Collins<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>