[openstack-dev] [neutron]The mechanism of physical_network & segmentation_id is logical?

Robert Kukura rkukura at redhat.com
Mon Feb 24 13:50:10 UTC 2014


On 02/24/2014 07:09 AM, 黎林果 wrote:
> Hi stackers,
> 
>   When create a network, if we don't set provider:network_type,
> provider:physical_network or provider:segmentation_id, the
> network_type will be from cfg, but the other tow is from db's first
> record. Code is
> 
> (physical_network,
>                      segmentation_id) = ovs_db_v2.reserve_vlan(session)
> 
> 
> 
>   There has tow questions.
>   1, network_vlan_ranges = physnet1:100:200
>      Can we config much physical_networks by cfg?

Hi Lee,

You can configure multiple physical_networks. For example:

network_vlan_ranges=physnet1:100:200,physnet1:1000:3000,physnet2:2000:4000,physnet3

This makes ranges of VLAN tags on physnet1 and physnet2 available for
allocation as tenant networks (assuming tenant_network_type = vlan).

This also makes physnet1, physnet2, and physnet3 available for
allocation of VLAN (and flat for OVS) provider networks (with admin
privilege). Note that physnet3 is available for allocation of provider
networks, but not for tenant networks because it does not have a range
of VLANs specified.

> 
>   2, If yes, the physical_network should be uncertainty. Dose this logical?

Each physical_network is considered to be a separate VLAN trunk, so VLAN
2345 on physnet1 is a different isolated network than VLAN 2345 on
physnet2. All the specified (physical_network,segmentation_id) tuples
form a pool of available tenant networks. Normal tenants have no
visibility of which physical_network trunk their networks get allocated on.

-Bob

> 
> 
> Regards!
> 
> Lee Li
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 




More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list