It's already possible to port-create with an IP address-and-subnet specified, which seems like an effective way of allocating an address and setting it aside for later. Doesn't this satisfy your needs?
-- Ian. On 16 July 2013 19:42, Mark McClain <mark.mccl...@dreamhost.com> wrote: > Have you considered altering the allocation range of a subnet? You can still > create ports with IPs that are within the subnet, but outside of the > allocation range. You can then control which instances get the "reserved" > IPs from the block that is outside of the allocation range. If this does not > work, I'd hold off making changes to the IPAM setup as this will be changing > in early H3. > > mark > > On Jul 15, 2013, at 7:50 AM, Cristian Tomoiaga <ctomoi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> I am working on implementing fixed IP reservation for tenants. My goal is to >> be able to reserve fixed IPs for a tenant and avoid as much as possible the >> "ephemeral" state of an IP. >> >> A basic workflow would be like this: >> >> Tenant or admin reserves one or more fixed IPs. He will than be able to use >> one or more of those reserved IPs on his instances (assign them to ports, >> support multiple IPs per port). >> If no/not enough fixed IPs are reserved, use the current IPAM implementation >> otherwise allow the tenant to select from his reserved IPs and then go >> through the current IPAM. >> >> I am using fixed routable and non-routable IPs for public and private >> networks (provider network , no NAT and no tagging). I will also use >> floating IPs for LB, DNS a.s.o. >> >> I have a few questions regarding the development of this since the >> documentation is still being worked on and I have to dig through the code a >> lot to understand a few things: >> >> 1. nova reserve-fixed-ip, this belongs to nova-network now obsolete right ? >> 2. I though of creating a new model (mainly a db table) to hold the IPs and >> the tenant IDs in order to keep the association. I've done this for the >> openvswitch plugin in ovs_models_v2 by adding a new model. I can probably do >> this globally in /db directly right (especially if I plan on supporting >> multiple plugins) ? >> 3. I was planning on adding to Neutron the api calls nova has for fixed IPs >> (ex: fixed-ip-get, reserve, unreserve) Does this seem right ? I am asking >> because I believe there is some work towards a new IPAM implementation and I >> would like to get some thoughts. I am also asking because to me it seems a >> little bit confusing that nova can also manage IPs and I am not sure if/what >> functions are >> obsolete there. >> 4. This should go as an extension first (as far as I understand for the >> docs). Add the extension to extend the Neutron API and modify the current >> IPAM right ? >> >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Cristian Tomoiaga >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
