yahoo-eng-team team mailing list archive
-
yahoo-eng-team team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #82802
[Bug 1458890] Re: [RFE] Add segment support to Neutron
** Changed in: neutron
Status: Triaged => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Yahoo!
Engineering Team, which is subscribed to neutron.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1458890
Title:
[RFE] Add segment support to Neutron
Status in neutron:
Fix Released
Bug description:
This is feedback from the Vancouver OpenStack Summit.
During the large deployment team (Go Daddy, Yahoo!, NeCTAR, CERN,
Rackspace, HP, BlueBox, among others) meeting, there was a discussion
of network architectures that we use to deliver Openstack. As we
talked it became clear that there are a number of challenges around
networking.
In many cases, our data center networks are architected with a
differientation between layer 2 and layer 3. Said another way, there
are distinct network "segments" which are only available to a subset
of compute hosts. These topolgies are typically necessary to manage
network resource capacity (IP addresses, broadcast domain size, ARP
tables, etc.) Network topologies like these are not possible to
describe with Neutron constructs today.
The traditional solution to this is tunneling and overlay networks
which makes all networks available everywhere in the data center.
However, overlay networks represent a large increase in complexity
that can be very difficult to troubleshoot. For this reason, many
large deployers are not using overlay networks at all (or only for
specific use cases like private tenant networks.)
Beacuse Neutron does not have constructs that accurately describe our
network architectures, we'd like to see the notion of a network
"segment" in Neutron. A "segment" could mean a L2 domain, IP block
boundary, or other partition. Operators could use this new construct
to build accurate models of network topology within Neutron, making it
much more usable.
Example: The typical use case is L2 segments that are restrained
to a single rack (or some subnet of compute hosts), but are still part
of a larger L3 network. In this case, the overall Neutron network
would describe the L3 network, and the network segments would be used
to describe the L2 segments.
WIth the network segment construct (which are not intended to be
exposed to end users ), there is also a need for some scheduling logic
around placement and addressing of instances on an appropriate network
segment based on availablity and capacity. This also implies a means
via API to report IP capacity of networks and segments, so we can
filter out segments without capacity and the compute nodes that are
tied to those segments.
Example: The end user chooses the Neutron network for their
instance, which is actually comprised of several lower level network
segments within Neutron. Scheduling must be done such that the
network segment chosen for the instance is available to the compute
node on which the instance is placed. Additionally, the network
segment that's chosen must have available IP capacity in order for the
instance to be placed there.
Also, the scheduling for resize, migrate, ... should only consider the
compute nodes allowed in the "network segment" where the VM is placed.
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Network_Segmentation_Usecases
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1458890/+subscriptions
References