[Openstack-operators] [kolla] Question about how Operators deploy
robert at kumul.us
Sat Feb 13 23:55:42 UTC 2016
+1 on two VIPs
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com>
> Hi folks,
> Unfortunately I won't be able to make it to the Operator midcycle because
> of budget constraints or I would find the answer to this question there.
> The Kolla upstream is busy sorting out external ssl termination and a
> question arose in the Kolla community around operator requirements for
> publicURL vs internalURL VIP management.
> At present, Kolla creates 3 Haproxy containers across 3 HA nodes with one
> VIP managed by keepalived. The VIP is used for internal communication
> only. Our PUBLIC_URL is set to a DNS name, and we expect the Operator to
> sort out how to map that DNS name to the internal VIP used by Kolla. The
> way I do this in my home lab is to use NAT to NAT my public_URL from the
> internet (hosted by dyndns) to my internal VIP that haproxies to my 3 HA
> control nodes. This is secure assuming someone doesn't bust through my NAT.
> An alternative has been suggested which is to use TWO vips. One for
> internal_url, one for public_url. Then the operator would only be
> responsible for selecting where to to allocate the public_url endpoint's
> VIP. I think this allows more flexibility without necessarily requiring
> NAT while still delivering a secure solution.
> Not having ever run an OpenStack cloud in production, how do the Operators
> want it? Our deciding factor here is what Operators want, not what is
> necessarily currently in the code base. We still have time to make this
> work differently for Mitaka, but I need feedback/advice quickly.
> The security guide seems to imply two VIPs are the way to Operate: (big
> The IRC discussion is here for reference:
> Thanks in Advance!
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-operators