yahoo-eng-team team mailing list archive

[Launchpad Bug Tracker <1351144@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

You have been subscribed to a public bug:


From: Rahul Sharma <rahuls@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, August 1, 2014 at 1:17 AM
To: Sachin Bansal <sbansal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Contrail Systems Configuration Team <dl-contrail-cfg@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Vedamurthy Ananth Joshi <vjoshi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Access using Floating IP's and L3 routers

Following is what I see on standard neutron.

Error: 404-{u'NeutronError': {u'message': u'External network
695c1164-73bb-4905-8b93-943ebcfae517 is not reachable from subnet
f2db88dc-378e-48e2-ac6f-23e9887d02b3. Therefore, cannot associate Port
23b45869-11db-4b7e-aabe-caa73f2826a8 with a Floating IP.', u'type':
u'ExternalGatewayForFloatingIPNotFound', u'detail': u'’}}


-
Rahul

From: Sachin Bansal <sbansal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, August 1, 2014 at 1:05 AM
To: Rahul Sharma <rahuls@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Contrail Systems Configuration Team <dl-contrail-cfg@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Vedamurthy Ananth Joshi <vjoshi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Access using Floating IP's and L3 routers

Per Ajay, devstack also behaves similar to ours.

Sachin

On Jul 31, 2014, at 12:17 PM, Sachin Bansal <sbansal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I hadn't seen this before and it does seem contradictory to our
understanding. This will make the entire concept of routers useless. We
will need to clarify.

Sachin


On Jul 31, 2014, at 12:08 PM, Rahul Sharma <rahuls@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

As far as I read/understood the spec, it talks of using external
networks. And that’s why we set “router:external” on FIP networks. And
for any port to use the FIP, its subnet should have an interface on the
router.


"Floating Ips can be created on any external network.  In order to associate a port with a floating IP, that port must be on a quantum network that has
 an interface on a router that has a gateway to that external network."


Floating IPs

Instead of having a separate notion of floating-ip pools, we just use this same notion of
 an external network.  IPs for use as floating-ips can be allocated from any available subnet associated with an external networks (Note: the idea of having a separate notion of an external network from a public/shared network is because the provider may not
 want to let tenants create VMs directly connected to the external network.)

Floating Ips can be created on any external network.  In order to associate a port with a floating IP, that port must be on a quantum network that has an interface
 on a router that has a gateway to that external network.


https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RqvZ50k60Dd19paKePHLHbk1x1lN2fXSXyWuC9OiJWI/edit?pli=1

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/quantum-l3-fwd-nat


-
Rahul

From: Sachin Bansal <sbansal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, August 1, 2014 at 12:25 AM
To: Rahul Sharma <rahuls@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Contrail Systems Configuration Team <dl-contrail-cfg@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Vedamurthy Ananth Joshi <vjoshi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Access using Floating IP's and L3 routers

I don't think your understanding is correct. Floating ip and routers are
two different ways of solving the same problem: Access to external
networks. We support both.

Sachin

On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:53 AM, Rahul Sharma <rahuls@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Access using floating ip’s shouldn’t work, until an interface from
private subnets is attached to the l3 router.

In our solution above is not required, neither we need to create l3
router nor set the public nets as router’s gateway.

In a nutshell floating ip functionality shouldn’t work without l3
routers, but in our case l3 routers aren’t a must.

From: Sachin Bansal <sbansal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, August 1, 2014 at 12:14 AM
To: Rahul Sharma <rahuls@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Contrail Systems Configuration Team <dl-contrail-cfg@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Vedamurthy Ananth Joshi <vjoshi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Access using Floating IP's and L3 routers

I am not sure what is the divergence. We need the exact same steps.

Sachin

On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:33 AM, Rahul Sharma <rahuls@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,
As per various articles, following is what needs to be done to get access with Floating IP’s and L3 routers. We diverge from following, in a way that we don’t have to add an interface from the subnet that we intend to provide access to ..to the router.

Is our divergence correct?

neutron router-create router1
neutron net-create private
neutron subnet-create private 10.0.0.0/24 --name private_subnet
neutron router-interface-add router1 private_subnet
neutron net-create public --router:external=True
neutron subnet-create public 192.168.0.0/24 --name public_subnet --enable_dhcp=False --allocation-pool start=192.168.0.200,end=192.168.0.250 --gateway=192.168.0.1
neutron router-gateway-set router1 public

** Affects: juniperopenstack
     Importance: High
     Assignee: Sachin Bansal (sbansal)
         Status: Opinion

** Affects: neutron
     Importance: Undecided
     Assignee: ivano (l-ivan)
         Status: Incomplete


** Tags: config neutronapi openstack releasenote
-- 
neutron, divergence in behavior wrt floatingips and l3 routers
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1351144
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Yahoo! Engineering Team, which is subscribed to neutron.