RE: vlan trunking support for network tunnels
Copying to dev mailing list.
- Greg
-----Original Message-----
From: Kyle Mestery (kmestery) [mailto:kmest...@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 6:33 AM
To: Bob Melander (bmelande)
Cc: Regnier, Greg J
Subject: Re: Service VM discussion - mgmt ifs
On Oct 3, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Bob Melander (bmelande) <bmela...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> The N1kv plugin only uses VXLAN but for that tunneling method the VLAN
> trunking is supported. The way it works is that each VXLAN is mapped to a
> *link local* VLAN. That technique is pretty much amenable to any tunneling
> method.
>
> There is a blueprint for trunking support in Neutron written by Kyle
> (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/quantum-network-bundle-api).
> I think that it would be very useful for the service VM framework if at least
> the ML2 and OVS plugins would implement the above blueprint.
>
I think this blueprint would be worth shooting for in Icehouse. I can flesh it
out a bit more so there is more to see on it and we can target it for Icehouse
if you guys think this makes sense. I think not only would it help the service
VM approach being taken here, but for running "OpenStack on OpenStack"
deployments, having a trunk port to the VM makes a lot of sense and enables
more networking options for that type of testing.
Thanks,
Kyle
> We actually have an implementation also for the OVS plugin that supports its
> tunneling methods. But we have not yet attempted to upstream it.
>
> Thanks,
> Bob
>
> Ps. Thanks for inserting the email comments into the document. If we can
> extend it further in the coming weeks to get a full(er) picture then during
> summit we can identify/discuss suitable pieces to implement in phases during
> Iceberg timeframe.
>
>
> 3 okt 2013 kl. 01:13 skrev "Regnier, Greg J" <greg.j.regn...@intel.com>:
>
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> Does the VLAN trunking solution work with tenant networks that use (VxLAN,
>> NVGRE) tunnels?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Greg
>>
>> From: Bob Melander (bmelande) [mailto:bmela...@cisco.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 2:57 PM
>> To: Regnier, Greg J; Sumit Naiksatam; Rudrajit Tapadar (rtapadar);
>> David Chang (dwchang); Joseph Swaminathan; Elzur, Uri; Marc Benoit;
>> Sridar Kandaswamy (skandasw); Dan Florea (dflorea); Kanzhe Jiang;
>> Kuang-Ching Wang; Gary Duan; Yi Sun; Rajesh Mohan; Maciocco,
>> Christian; Kyle Mestery (kmestery)
>> Subject: Re: Service VM discussion - mgmt ifs ... The service VM
>> framework scheduler should preferably also allow selection of VIFs to
>> host a logical resource's logical interfaces. To clarify the last statement,
>> one "use case"
>> could be to spin up a VM with more VIFs than are needed initially
>> (e.g., if the VM does not support vif hot-plugging). Another "use
>> case" is if the plugin supports VLAN trunking and attachement of the
>> logical resource's logical interface to a network corresponds to trunking of
>> a network on a VIF.
>>
>> There are at least three (or four) ways to dynamically plug a logical
>> service resource inside a VM to networks:
>> - Create a VM VIF on demand for the logical interface of the service
>> resource
>> ("hot-plugging")
>> - Pre-populate the VM with a set of VIFs that can be allocated to
>> logical interfaces of the service resources
>> - Create a set of VM VIFs (on demand or during VM creation) that
>> carry VLAN trunks for which logical (VLAN) interfaces are created and
>> allocated to service resources.
>>
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
