Hey Mike,

Would you send along your solution off-list? I'm curious, and I won't judge
:)

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Mike Spreitzer <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jacob Godin <[email protected]> wrote on 04/14/2015 05:12:48 PM:
>
> > Absolutely. We're trying to reduce our public IPv4 usage, so having
> > one per tenant network (not even including floating IPs) is a drain.
>
> I am having exactly the same issue.  I am currently solving it with a
> different hack that nobody likes, I will not even describe it here.  But
> total agreement that the problem is important.
>
> IPv6 is the ultimate answer, provided there is a reasonably smooth
> transition.  I think we will need to support a tenant that is using both v4
> and v6 during his transition.  This will require NAT between a tenant's v4
> and v6.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-operators mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Reply via email to