Thanks, Flint WALRUS. I will certainly try that. On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Flint WALRUS <gael.ther...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As you’re using a L2 network topology and until all of your project use a > different network you can do: > > domain=domain1,10.10.10.0/24 > domain=domain2,20.20.20.0/24 > > Within the dnsmasq-neutron.conf file. > Of course, restart the neutron-server service once done. > Le mer. 10 janv. 2018 à 22:40, Jonathan Mills <jonmi...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > >> Dear Operators, >> >> I have a mix of Mitaka and Pike clusters, all for private clouds, and >> with multiple tenants. I am very interested in having the ability to have >> per-network (really, per-tenant) dns_domain. You would think that this >> works, based on the documentation here: https://docs.openstack.org/ >> ocata/networking-guide/config-dns-int.html >> >> And yes, I have read and re-read that document many times, and carefully >> followed its instructions. I have the 'dns' extension_driver enabled in >> ML2. I have set an alternate value from 'openstacklocal' in neutron.conf. >> I am using the neutron dnsmasq processes as my real DNS servers in my VMs >> for tenant internal name resolution. (Instance short-name resolution does >> work, it's just that the FQDN of every VM is wrong.) I have created >> per-network dns_domain entries in my neutron database. Nevertheless, it >> does not work. In every tenant, every VM has a dns suffix equal to >> whatever I have set for 'dns_domain' in neutron.conf (the global default). >> Scouring the web for clues, I've come across this, which seems to describe >> my problem: >> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1580588 >> >> Notice that the importance is 'wishlist'. Wishlist? I find it >> surprising that it is a mere wish to have DNS work as expected. I'm >> curious so I'm asking the community, is this really not working for >> anyone? And if it is not working for anyone else either, is it really not >> a big deal? It seems to me this would pose a rather large problem for any >> number of use cases. In my immediate situation, I am deploying VMs onto a >> provider network that has a pre-existing Puppet infrastructure, and all the >> FQDNs are wrong, which means the generation of Puppet SSL certificates on >> these VMs is problematic. >> >> Any feedback would be much appreciated! >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jonathan Mills >> NASA Center for Climate Simulation (NCCS) >> Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-operators mailing list >> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >> >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
