On 8/27/2018 1:53 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 8/27/2018 12:11 PM, Miguel Lavalle wrote:
Isn't multiple port binding what we need in the case of ports? In my
mind, the big motivator for multiple port binding is the ability to
change a port's backend
Hmm, yes maybe. Nova's usage of multiple port bindings today is
restricted to live migration which isn't what we're supporting with the
initial cross-cell (cold) migration support, but it could be a
dependency if that's what we need.
What I was wondering is if there is a concept like a port spanning or
migrating across networks? I'm assuming there isn't, and I'm not even
sure if that would be required here. But it would mean there is an
implicit requirement that for cross-cell migration to work, neutron
networks need to span cells (similarly storage backends would need to
span cells).
In thinking about this again (sleepless at 3am of course), port bindings
doesn't help us here if we're orchestrating the cross-cell move using
shelve offload, because in that case the port is unbound from the source
host - while the instance is shelved offloaded, it has no host. When we
unshelve in the new cell, we'd update the port binding. So there isn't
really a use in this flow for multiple port bindings on multiple hosts
(assuming we stick with using the shelve/unshelve idea here).
--
Thanks,
Matt
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
