Anthony,

Thanks for your reply.

If HA method like VRRP are used for IPv6 router, according to the VRRP RFC with IPv6 included, the servers should be auto-configured with the active router's LLA as the default route before the failover happens and still remain that route after the failover. In other word, there should be no need to use two LLAs for default route of a subnet unless load balance is required.

When the backup router become the master router, the backup router should be responsible for sending out an unsolicited ND neighbor advertisement with the associated LLA (the previous master's LLA) immediately to update the bridge learning state and sending out router advertisement with the same options with the previous master to maintain the route and bridge learning.

This is shown in http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5798#section-4.1 and the actions backup router should take after failover is documented here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5798#section-6.4.2. The need for immediate messaging sending and periodic message sending is documented here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5798#section-2.4

Since the keepalived manager support for L3 HA is merged: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/68142/43. And keepalived release 1.2.0 supports VRRP IPv6 features ( http://www.keepalived.org/changelog.html, see Release 1.2.0 | VRRP IPv6 Release). I think we can check if keepalived can satisfy our requirement here and if that will cause any conflicts with RADVD.

Thoughts?

Xu Han

On 08/28/2014 10:11 PM, Veiga, Anthony wrote:


    Anthony and Robert,

    Thanks for your reply. I don't know if the arping is there for
    NAT, but I am pretty sure it's for HA setup to broadcast the
    router's own change since the arping is controlled by
    "send_arp_for_ha" config. By checking the man page of arping, you
    can find the "arping -A" we use in code is sending out ARP REPLY
    instead of ARP REQUEST. This is like saying "I am here" instead of
    "where are you". I didn't realized this either until Brain pointed
    this out at my code review below.


That's what I was trying to say earlier. Sending out the RA is the same effect. RA says "I'm here, oh and I'm also a router" and should supersede the need for an unsolicited NA. The only thing to consider here is that RAs are from LLAs. If you're doing IPv6 HA, you'll need to have two gateway IPs for the RA of the standby to work. So far as I know, I think there's still a bug out on this since you can only have one gateway per subnet.



    http://linux.die.net/man/8/arping

    https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114437/2/neutron/agent/l3_agent.py

    Thoughts?

    Xu Han


    On 08/27/2014 10:01 PM, Veiga, Anthony wrote:


        Hi Xuhan,

        What I saw is that GARP is sent to the gateway port and also
        to the router ports, from a neutron router. I'm not sure why
        it's sent to the router ports (internal network). My
        understanding for arping to the gateway port is that it is
        needed for proper NAT operation. Since we are not planning to
        support ipv6 NAT, so this is not required/needed for ipv6 any
        more?


    I agree that this is no longer necessary.


        There is an abandoned patch that disabled the arping for ipv6
        gateway port:
        https://review.openstack.org/#/c/77471/3/neutron/agent/l3_agent.py

        thanks,
        Robert

        On 8/27/14, 1:03 AM, "Xuhan Peng" <pengxu...@gmail.com
        <mailto:pengxu...@gmail.com>> wrote:

            As a follow-up action of yesterday's IPv6 sub-team
            meeting, I would like to start a discussion about how to
            support l3 agent HA when IP version is IPv6.

            This problem is triggered by bug [1] where sending
            gratuitous arp packet for HA doesn't work for IPv6 subnet
            gateways. This is because neighbor discovery instead of
            ARP should be used for IPv6.

            My thought to solve this problem turns into how to send
            out neighbor advertisement for IPv6 routers just like
            sending ARP reply for IPv4 routers after reading the
            comments on code review [2].

            I searched for utilities which can do this and only find
            a utility called ndsend [3] as part of vzctl on ubuntu. I
            could not find similar tools on other linux distributions.

            There are comments in yesterday's meeting that it's the
            new router's job to send out RA and there is no need for
            neighbor discovery. But we didn't get enough time to
            finish the discussion.


    Because OpenStack runs the l3 agent, it is the router.  Instead
    of needing to do gratuitous ARP to alert all clients of the new
    MAC, a simple RA from the new router for the same prefix would
    accomplish the same, without having to resort to a special
    package to generate unsolicited NA packets.  RAs must be
    generated from the l3 agent anyway if it's the gateway, and we're
    doing that via radvd now.  The HA failover simply needs to start
    the proper radvd process on the secondary gateway and resume
    normal operation.


            Can you comment your thoughts about how to solve this
            problem in this thread, please?

            [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1357068

            [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114437/

            [3]
            http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/oneiric/man8/ndsend.8.html

            Thanks,
            Xu Han



    -Anthony


    _______________________________________________
    OpenStack-dev mailing list
    
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.orghttp://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

Reply via email to