Open Stack

Mike, pls share the solution, some are interested even if is a hack as long
as it gets the job done.



On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Jacob Godin <jacobgodin at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Mike,
>
> Would you send along your solution off-list? I'm curious, and I won't
> judge :)
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Mike Spreitzer <mspreitz at us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Jacob Godin <jacobgodin at gmail.com> wrote on 04/14/2015 05:12:48 PM:
>>
>> > Absolutely. We're trying to reduce our public IPv4 usage, so having
>> > one per tenant network (not even including floating IPs) is a drain.
>>
>> I am having exactly the same issue.  I am currently solving it with a
>> different hack that nobody likes, I will not even describe it here.  But
>> total agreement that the problem is important.
>>
>> IPv6 is the ultimate answer, provided there is a reasonably smooth
>> transition.  I think we will need to support a tenant that is using both v4
>> and v6 during his transition.  This will require NAT between a tenant's v4
>> and v6.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mike
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20150415/b8ccb298/attachment.html>