Open Stack

Have you considered altering the allocation range of a subnet?  You can still create ports with IPs that are within the subnet, but outside of the allocation range.  You can then control which instances get the "reserved" IPs from the block that is outside of the allocation range.  If this does not work, I'd hold off making changes to the IPAM setup as this will be changing in early H3.

mark

On Jul 15, 2013, at 7:50 AM, Cristian Tomoiaga <ctomoiaga at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
> 
> I am working on implementing fixed IP reservation for tenants. My goal is to be able to reserve fixed IPs for a tenant and avoid as much as possible the "ephemeral" state of an IP.
> 
> A basic workflow would be like this:
> 
> Tenant or admin reserves one or more fixed IPs. He will than be able to use one or more of those reserved IPs on his instances (assign them to ports, support multiple IPs per port).
> If no/not enough fixed IPs are reserved, use the current IPAM implementation otherwise allow the tenant to select from his reserved IPs and then go through the current IPAM.
> 
> I am using fixed routable and non-routable IPs for public and private networks (provider network , no NAT and no tagging). I will also use floating IPs for LB, DNS a.s.o.
> 
> I have a few questions regarding the development of this since the documentation is still being worked on and I have to dig through the code a lot to understand a few things:
> 
> 1. nova reserve-fixed-ip, this belongs to nova-network now obsolete right ?
> 2. I though of creating a new model (mainly a db table) to hold the IPs and the tenant IDs in order to keep the association. I've done this for the openvswitch plugin in ovs_models_v2 by adding a new model. I can probably do this globally in /db directly right (especially if I plan on supporting multiple plugins) ?
> 3. I was planning on adding to Neutron the api calls nova has for fixed IPs (ex: fixed-ip-get, reserve, unreserve) Does this seem right ? I am asking because I believe there is some work towards a new IPAM implementation and I would like to get some thoughts. I am also asking because to me it seems a little bit confusing that nova can also manage IPs and I am not sure if/what functions are 
> obsolete there.
> 4. This should go as an extension first (as far as I understand for the docs). Add the extension to extend the Neutron API and modify the current IPAM right ?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Cristian Tomoiaga
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev