Open Stack

Sorry not really. It's still not clear to me why multiple nics would be
required on the same L2 domain. Would you mind drawing your use case here:
http://asciiflow.com/ (or maybe google docs) labeling the different
interfaces with ips and the flow of packets you want. Also perhaps their
header values. You say "Without modifying packet hearders" in your email.
I'm guessing your referring to L2 headers? Though I'm still not really
following. Sorry :/


On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Vikash Kumar <
vikash.kumar at oneconvergence.com> wrote:

> Aaron,
>
>   The idea is to steer packets coming from source S1 ( belong to net1)
> destined to destination D1 (belong to net1)  through bunch of L2 appliances
> (like firewall) without modifying packet headers. The core idea is to keep
> appliances (on net1), source S1 (VM on net1) and destination D1(VM on
> net1)  on same broadcast domain. I hope it wl now make sense.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Vikash Kumar <
> vikash.kumar at oneconvergence.com> wrote:
>
>> Kevin , this can be one approach but not sure. But certainly won't solve
>> all cases. :)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Kevin Benton <blak111 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, I was aware of allowed address pairs, but that doesn't help with
>>> the IP allocation part.
>>>
>>> Is this the tenant workflow for this use case?
>>>
>>> 1. Create an instance.
>>> 2. Wait to see what which subnet it gets an allocation from.
>>> 3. Pick an IP from that subnet that doesn't currently appear to be in
>>> use.
>>> 4. Use the neutron-cli or API to update the port object with the extra
>>> IP.
>>> 5. Hope that Neutron will never allocate that IP address for something
>>> else.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Aaron Rosen <aaronorosen at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whoops Akihiro beat me to it :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Aaron Rosen <aaronorosen at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The allowed-address-pair extension that was added here (
>>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/38230/) allows us to add arbitrary
>>>>> ips to an interface to allow them. This is useful if you want to run
>>>>> something like VRRP between two instances.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:39 PM, Kevin Benton <blak111 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was under the impression that the security group rules blocked
>>>>>> addresses not assigned by neutron[1].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.
>>>>>> https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/neutron/agent/linux/iptables_firewall.py#L188
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Aaron Rosen <aaronorosen at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can do it with ip aliasing and use one interface:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.22/24
>>>>>>> ifconfig eth0:1 10.0.0.23/24
>>>>>>> ifconfig eth0:2 10.0.0.24/24
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2: eth0: <NO-CARRIER,BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state
>>>>>>> DOWN qlen 1000
>>>>>>>     link/ether 40:6c:8f:1a:a9:31 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>>>>>>>     inet 10.0.0.22/24 brd 10.0.0.255 scope global eth0
>>>>>>>        valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>>>>>>>     inet 10.0.0.23/24 brd 10.0.0.255 scope global secondary eth0:1
>>>>>>>        valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>>>>>>>     inet 10.0.0.24/24 brd 10.0.0.255 scope global secondary eth0:2
>>>>>>>        valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Kevin Benton <blak111 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Web server running multiple SSL sites that wants to be compatible
>>>>>>>> with clients that don't support the SNI extension. There is no way for a
>>>>>>>> server to get multiple IP addresses on the same interface is there?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Aaron Rosen <aaronorosen at gmail.com
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is true. Several people have asked this same question over
>>>>>>>>> the years though I've yet to hear a use case why one really need to do
>>>>>>>>> this. Do you have one?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Ronak Shah <
>>>>>>>>> ronak at nuagenetworks.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vikash,
>>>>>>>>>> Currently this is not supported. the NIC not only needs to be in
>>>>>>>>>> different subnet, they have to be in different network as well (container
>>>>>>>>>> for the subnet)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>> Ronak
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Vikash Kumar <
>>>>>>>>>> vikash.kumar at oneconvergence.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> *With 'interfaces' I mean 'nics' of VM*.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Vikash Kumar <
>>>>>>>>>>> vikash.kumar at oneconvergence.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>      I want to launch one VM which will have two Ethernet
>>>>>>>>>>>> interfaces with IP of single subnet. Is this supported now in openstack ?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any suggestion ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanx
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Kevin Benton
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Kevin Benton
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kevin Benton
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140416/f5a9a5d7/attachment.html>