On 27/08/13 15:23, Maru Newby wrote: > > On Aug 26, 2013, at 9:39 PM, Yongsheng Gong <gong...@unitedstack.com> wrote: > >> First 'be like nova-network' is a merit for some deployments. > > I'm afraid 'merit' is a bit vague for me. Would you please elaborate?
One area of 'merit' in this area is for migration from nova-network to neutron. If there's something exactly analogous to something that already exists, its easier to move across. > >> second, To allow admin to decide which network will be multihosted at >> runtime will enable the neutron to continue using the current network node >> (dhcp agent) mode at the same time. > > If multi-host and non- multi-host networks are permitted to co-exist (because > configuration is per-network), won't compute nodes have to be allowed to be > heterogenous (some multi-host capable, some not)? And won't Nova then need > to schedule VMs configured with multi-host networks on compatible nodes? I > don't recall mention of this issue in the blueprint or design doc, and would > appreciate pointers to where this decision was documented. > > >> >> If we force the network multihosted when the configuration enable_multihost >> is true, and then administrator wants to transfer to normal neutron way, >> he/she must modify the configuration item and then restart. > > I'm afraid I don't follow - are you suggesting that configuring multi-host > globally will be harder on admins than the change under review? Switching to > non multi-host under the current proposal involves reconfiguring and > restarting of an awful lot of agents, to say nothing of the db changes. > > > m. > > >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Maru Newby <ma...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On Aug 26, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Edgar Magana <emag...@plumgrid.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Developers, >>> >>> Let me explain my point of view on this topic and please share your >>> thoughts in order to merge this new feature ASAP. >>> >>> My understanding is that multi-host is nova-network HA and we are >>> implementing this bp >>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/quantum-multihost for the >>> same reason. >>> So, If in neutron configuration admin enables multi-host: >>> etc/dhcp_agent.ini >>> >>> # Support multi host networks >>> # enable_multihost = False >>> >>> Why do tenants needs to be aware of this? They should just create networks >>> in the way they normally do and not by adding the "multihost" extension. >> >> I was pretty confused until I looked at the nova-network HA doc [1]. The >> proposed design would seem to emulate nova-network's multi-host HA option, >> where it was necessary to both run nova-network on every compute node and >> create a network explicitly as multi-host. I'm not sure why nova-network >> was implemented in this way, since it would appear that multi-host is >> basically all-or-nothing. Once nova-network services are running on every >> compute node, what does it mean to create a network that is not multi-host? >> >> So, to Edgar's question - is there a reason other than 'be like >> nova-network' for requiring neutron multi-host to be configured per-network? >> >> >> m. >> >> 1: >> http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/admin/content/existing-ha-networking-options.html >> >> >>> I could be totally wrong and crazy, so please provide some feedback. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Edgar >>> >>> >>> From: Yongsheng Gong <gong...@unitedstack.com> >>> Date: Monday, August 26, 2013 2:58 PM >>> To: "Kyle Mestery (kmestery)" <kmest...@cisco.com>, Aaron Rosen >>> <aro...@nicira.com>, Armando Migliaccio <amigliac...@vmware.com>, Akihiro >>> MOTOKI <amot...@gmail.com>, Edgar Magana <emag...@plumgrid.com>, Maru Newby >>> <ma...@redhat.com>, Nachi Ueno <na...@nttmcl.com>, Salvatore Orlando >>> <sorla...@nicira.com>, Sumit Naiksatam <sumit.naiksa...@bigswitch.com>, >>> Mark McClain <mark.mccl...@dreamhost.com>, Gary Kotton >>> <gkot...@vmware.com>, Robert Kukura <rkuk...@redhat.com> >>> Cc: OpenStack List <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >>> Subject: Re: About multihost patch review >>> >>> Hi, >>> Edgar Magana has commented to say: >>> 'This is the part that for me is confusing and I will need some >>> clarification from the community. Do we expect to have the multi-host >>> feature as an extension or something that will natural work as long as the >>> deployment include more than one Network Node. In my opinion, Neutron >>> deployments with more than one Network Node by default should call DHCP >>> agents in all those nodes without the need to use an extension. If the >>> community has decided to do this by extensions, then I am fine' at >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/37919/11/neutron/extensions/multihostnetwork.py >>> >>> I have commented back, what is your opinion about it? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Yong Sheng Gong >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) >>> <kmest...@cisco.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Yong: >>>> >>>> I'll review this and try it out today. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Kyle >>>> >>>> On Aug 15, 2013, at 10:01 PM, Yongsheng Gong <gong...@unitedstack.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The multihost patch is there for a long long time, can someone help to >>>>> review? >>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/37919/ >>>> >>> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
