Open Stack

Thank you guys for your answers!

On 8 August 2013 18:31, Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:

> On 9 August 2013 07:51, Martinx - ジェームズ <thiagocmartinsc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 1- NAT;
>
> There's no /need/ for it in IP4 in a lot of environments. Only public
> cloud providers really need to do NAT in IP4.


Mostly because of IPv4 exhaustion, RackSpace Public Cloud ISP give to me,
public IPv4 within my cloud...

AWS/EC2 now focus on "VPCs" (IPv4 "private") networks but, I'm seeing this
act more or less like "milking a dead cow (IPv4)"...


> > 2- Floating IPs;
>
> Implemented via NAT, but not about NAT: they are about being able to
> move endpoints instantly without dns cache issues - an HA tool, and a
> well-known-address tool. The implementation is changable but the
> concept is valuable in IPv6 too IMNSHO.
>

Mmm... Okay, I understand it a bit better now... I'll research a bit more
about it...   =)

Anyway, I would like to be able to live without it... If possible / not too
much trouble (for OpenStack devel team) to be able to disable it with a
option...


>
> > 3- Use of Namespaces.
>
> I don't see how this is related : with SDN someone can define the same
> IPv6 range in two tenants, so namespaces are still needed.
>

Are you saying that is this:

* give to Tenant A (namespace X), the IPv6 block: 2001:1291:200:83f6::/64

* give to Tenant B (namespace Y), the same IPv6 block:
2001:1291:200:83f6::/64

...possible???

Sounds cool! I'll take a deep look into SDN...

-Rob
>

Thanks for clarifying it for me!

-
 Thiago


>
> --
> Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
> Distinguished Technologist
> HP Converged Cloud
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20130808/a4258350/attachment.html>