On 06/30/2016 01:05 PM, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
On Jun 30, 2016, at 7:04 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
For what it is worth, a quick test with some Mitaka-based bits,
using 192.168.123.0/24 as the private network and ping suggests the
neutron routers will be willing to forward the traffic just fine.
Is there anything specific you did to allow this? Because I
accidental "tested" this myself yesterday.
I created a network/subnet/router tuple in a DVR setup (slight chance I
added --distributed false to the router-create - I've reinstalled the
setup at this point so cannot check), noted the public IP of the router,
and the private IP of the instance, then on one of my controllers which
was connected to the external VM VLAN on which the router is I added a
host route for the instance's private IP, pointing at the public IP of
the router and started pinging. The neutron private network was VxLAN,
and in my case carried on a separate VLAN from the External VM VLAN. In
my case, the instances private IP was a 192.168.123.X, and the router's
public IP was a 10.249.mutter.
I didn't try anything from farther afield because I don't have control
of those bits in my particular test environment.
happy benchmarking,
rick jones
I have my external/physical network (192.168.69.0/24) with the
GW/FW/NAT (192.168.69.1) that also do DHCP for that network.
In my tenant network (10.0.0.0/16), when I created a VM, I
choose this network as the primary/first network and then
the tenant network as second.
So when the VM booted, It got a 192.168.69.0/24 address!
However, I could not reach it. And it could not reach anything
else either.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
