Open Stack

Hello,

Thanks for link to this patch. It should solve my current need :)


-- 
Pozdrawiam
Sławek Kapłoński
slawek at kaplonski.pl


Dnia Fri, 23 May 2014 15:23:49 +0100
Salvatore Orlando <sorlando at nicira.com> napisał:

> Hi Jack,
> 
> Do you mean this change by any chance?
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/77043/
> 
> Salvatore
> 
> 
> On 23 May 2014 15:10, McCann, Jack <jack.mccann at hp.com> wrote:
> 
> >  From the original ask:
> >
> >
> >
> > > I know that there is possibility to create port with IP
> > > and later connect VM to this port. This solution is almost ok
> > > for me but problem is when user delete this instance - then
> > > port is also deleted and it is not reserved still for the same
> > > user and tenant.
> >
> >
> >
> > This sounds like the problem of nova deleting a port that it did not
> >
> > create.  We could look at a change (likely involving nova and
> > neutron)
> >
> > such that if I create a port and pass it in to nova boot, nova would
> >
> > not delete that port when the VM is deleted.
> >
> >
> >
> > - Jack
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Mohammad Banikazemi [mailto:mb at us.ibm.com]
> > *Sent:* Thursday, May 22, 2014 10:41 PM
> >
> > *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > *Cc:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> >
> > *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] reservation of fixed ip
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, for a use case we had in mind we were trying to figure out
> > how to simply get an IP address on a subnet. We essentially want to
> > use such an address internally by the controller and make sure it
> > is not used for a port that gets created on a network with that
> > subnet. In this use case, an interface to IPAM for removing an
> > address from the pool of available addresses (and the interface to
> > possibly return the address to the pool) would be sufficient.
> >
> > Mohammad
> >
> > [image: Inactive hide details for Carl Baldwin ---05/22/2014
> > 06:19:16 PM---If an IP is reserved for a tenant, should the tenant
> > need to]Carl Baldwin ---05/22/2014 06:19:16 PM---If an IP is
> > reserved for a tenant, should the tenant need to explicitly ask for
> > that specific IP to
> >
> > From: Carl Baldwin <carl at ecbaldwin.net>
> > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> > openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>,
> > Date: 05/22/2014 06:19 PM
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] reservation of fixed ip
> >  ------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > If an IP is reserved for a tenant, should the tenant need to
> > explicitly ask for that specific IP to be allocated when creating a
> > floating ip or port?  And it would pull from the regular pool if a
> > specific IP is not requested.  Or, does the allocator just pull from
> > the tenant's reserved pool whenever it needs an IP on a subnet?  If
> > the latter, then I think Salvatore's concern still a valid one.
> >
> > I think if a tenant wants an IP address reserved then he probably
> > has a specific purpose for that IP address in mind.  That leads me
> > to think that he should be required to pass the specific address
> > when creating the associated object in order to make use of it.  We
> > can't do that yet with all types of allocations but there are
> > reviews in progress [1][2].
> >
> > Carl
> >
> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/70286/
> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83664/
> >
> > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Sławek Kapłoński
> > <slawek at kaplonski.pl> wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > >
> > > Dnia Wed, 21 May 2014 23:51:48 +0100
> > > Salvatore Orlando <sorlando at nicira.com> napisał:
> > >
> > >> In principle there is nothing that should prevent us from
> > >> implementing an IP reservation mechanism.
> > >>
> > >> As with anything, the first thing to check is literature or
> > >> "related work"! If any other IaaS system is implementing such a
> > >> mechanism, is it exposed through the API somehow?
> > >> Also this feature is likely to be provided by IPAM systems. If
> > >> yes, what constructs do they use?
> > >> I do not have the answers to this questions, but I'll try to
> > >> document myself; if you have them - please post them here.
> > >>
> > >> This new feature would probably be baked into neutron's IPAM
> > >> logic. When allocating an IP, first check from within the IP
> > >> reservation pool, and then if it's not found check from standard
> > >> allocation pools (this has non negligible impact on availability
> > >> ranges management, but these are implementation details).
> > >> Aspects to consider, requirement-wise, are:
> > >> 1) Should reservations also be classified by "qualification" of
> > >> the port? For instance, is it important to specify that an IP
> > >> should be used for the gateway port rather than for a floating
> > >> IP port?
> > >
> > > IMHO it is not required when IP is reserved. User should have
> > > possibility to reserve such IP for his tenant and later use it as
> > > he want (floating ip, instance or whatever)
> > >
> > >> 2) Are reservations something that an admin could specify on a
> > >> tenant-basis (hence an admin API extension), or an implicit
> > >> mechanism that can be tuned using configuration variables (for
> > >> instance create an IP reservation a for gateway port for a given
> > >> tenant when a router gateway is set).
> > >>
> > >> I apologise if these questions are dumb. I'm just trying to
> > >> frame this discussion into something which could then possibly
> > >> lead to submitting a specification.
> > >>
> > >> Salvatore
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 21 May 2014 21:37, Collins, Sean
> > >> <Sean_Collins2 at cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > (Edited the subject since a lot of people filter based on the
> > >> > subject line)
> > >> >
> > >> > I would also be interested in reserved IPs - since we do not
> > >> > deploy the layer 3 agent and use the provider networking
> > >> > extension and a hardware router.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 03:46:53PM EDT, Sławek Kapłoński wrote:
> > >> > > Hello,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Ok, I found that now there is probably no such feature to
> > >> > > reserve fixed ip for tenant. So I was thinking about add
> > >> > > such feature to neutron. I mean that it should have new
> > >> > > table with reserved ips in neutron database and neutron will
> > >> > > check this table every time when new port will be created
> > >> > > (or updated) and IP should be associated with this port. If
> > >> > > user has got reserved IP it should be then used for new
> > >> > > port, if IP is reserver by other tenant - it shouldn't be
> > >> > > used. What You are thinking about such possibility? Is it
> > >> > > possible to add it in some future release of neutron?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > Best regards
> > >> > > Sławek Kapłoński
> > >> > > slawek at kaplonski.pl
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Dnia Mon, 19 May 2014 20:07:43 +0200
> > >> > > Sławek Kapłoński <slawek at kaplonski.pl> napisał:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Hello,
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I'm using openstack with neutron and ML2 plugin. Is there
> > >> > > > any way to reserve fixed IP from shared external network
> > >> > > > for one tenant? I know that there is possibility to create
> > >> > > > port with IP and later connect VM to this port. This
> > >> > > > solution is almost ok for me but problem is when user
> > >> > > > delete this instance - then port is also deleted and it is
> > >> > > > not reserved still for the same user and tenant. So maybe
> > >> > > > there is any solution to reserve it "permanent"? I know
> > >> > > > also about floating IPs but I don't use L3 agents so this
> > >> > > > is probably not for me :)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > _______________________________________________
> > >> > > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > >> > > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > >> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Sean M. Collins
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > >> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > >> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> > >> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards
> > > Sławek Kapłoński
> > > slawek at kaplonski.pl
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> >