Hi Babu, Juan Just one more thing.
Fuel plugin support 2 odl version as below. I did notice error you have mentioned with 5.0.0-1 but not with 5.2.0-1 and I do see the issue like VM's not reachable even with 5.2.0.1 - 5.0.0-1 - 5.2.0-1 Regards, Vijay On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Juan Vidal ALLENDE < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Babu, > > I've faced that error sometimes. It seems that some versions of > networking-odl have a bug, which prevents binding on flat networks: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/networking-odl/+bug/1638000 > > You can apply this patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/425246/ and > then restart neutron services in the controller (or even better, restart > the whole controller). That worked for me. > > Regards, > Juan > > > On mar, 2017-03-21 at 13:14 +0000, Babu Kothandaraman wrote: > > Hi All, > > > Sorry for bombarding with a lot of questions, I'm pretty new to Openstack > and OPNFV :). > > The openstack setup from the scenario "os-odl_l2-sfc-noha". The router > created for admin_floating_net network with the subnet 172.16.0.0/24, > named router04 has two interfaces one of which is external gateway and it > status is always down. The external gateway port has VIF TYPE as binding > failed. Below I have added the neutron logs. > > > The neutron logs has the following error message: > 2017-03-16 15:52:34.948 16091 ERROR networking_odl.ml2.network_topology > [req-6aeec757-5ee0-48ce-b800-8389a558b3bc - - - - -] Unable to bind port > element for given host and valid VIF types: > hostname: node-3.domain.tld > valid VIF types: vhostuser, ovs > $510-da5b-4944-9659-6c8a3ddb0b0d', 'network_type': u'flat'}] > > > But the beginning of the neutron log it says: > 2017-03-16 15:37:37.133 14132 INFO neutron.manager [-] Loading core > plugin: neutron.plugins.ml2.plugin.Ml2Plugin > 2017-03-16 15:37:37.303 14132 INFO neutron.plugins.ml2.managers [-] > Configured type driver names: ['local', 'flat', 'vlan', 'gre', 'vxlan'] > 2017-03-16 15:37:37.305 14132 INFO neutron.plugins.ml2.drivers.type_flat > [-] Arbitrary flat physical_network names allowed > 2017-03-16 15:37:37.308 14132 INFO neutron.plugins.ml2.drivers.type_vlan > [-] Network VLAN ranges: {} > 2017-03-16 15:37:37.313 14132 INFO neutron.plugins.ml2.drivers.type_local > [-] ML2 LocalTypeDriver initialization complete > 2017-03-16 15:37:37.317 14132 INFO neutron.plugins.ml2.managers [-] Loaded > type driver names: ['flat', 'vlan', 'gre', 'local', 'vxlan'] > 2017-03-16 15:37:37.317 14132 INFO neutron.plugins.ml2.managers [-] > Registered types: ['flat', 'vlan', 'local', 'gre', 'vxlan'] > > By which I assume Opendaylight ML2 plugin supports flat type network. > > > Because of this issue, I'm not able to reach the VM's created as part of > this network and my functest fails too. Anyone else faced the same issue? > Any pointers regarding this would be quite helpful. > Thanks in advance. > > > > Best Regards, > > Babu > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Manuel Buil <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 15, 2017 3:14 PM > *To:* Babu Kothandaraman; Brady Allen Johnson; Michail Polenchuk; > [email protected] > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC agent for > SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation > > Hello Babu, > > Yes, that is the right place. Some sub-tests are still failing though. The > deadline to have them working in next Friday 24th of March. However, try to > launch them because everything should be working (except you will get a > message that some sub-tests fail). > > Regards, > Manuel > > On 03/15/2017 01:09 PM, Babu Kothandaraman wrote: > > Brady, > > > Thanks for your prompt reply, Sorry about that, we did actually deploy " > os-odl_l2-sfc-noha" scenario. We were trying the func test in > https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/sfc/Functest+SFC-ODL+-+Test+1 to test the > deployment. But we are not sure if this is the right one to follow > according to the discussion above. Is this the right guide to follow for > testing the deployment? > > > > Best Regards, > > Babu > ------------------------------ > *From:* Brady Allen Johnson <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 15, 2017 12:56:26 PM > *To:* Babu Kothandaraman; Michail Polenchuk; [email protected]; > [email protected] > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC agent for > SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation > > > > Babu, > > I think it would be better to instead deploy OPNFV Colorado with the > "os-odl_l2-sfc-noha" scenario. This document should help guide you through > the installation: > > http://artifacts.opnfv.org/sfc/colorado/2.0/docs/ > installationprocedure/index.html > > Regards, > > Brady > > -----Original Message----- > *From*: Babu Kothandaraman <[email protected] > <babu%20kothandaraman%20%[email protected]%3e>> > *To*: Brady Allen Johnson <[email protected] > <brady%20allen%20johnson%20%[email protected]%3e>>, > Michail Polenchuk <[email protected] > <michail%20polenchuk%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] < > [email protected] <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, > [email protected] <[email protected] > <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>> > *Cc*: [email protected] <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists. > opnfv.org > <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e> > > > *Subject*: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC agent for > SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation > *Date*: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:46:37 +0000 > > Hi Brady, > > > I'm Babu from Packetfront software, we have installed OPNFV colorado for > os-odl_l2-nofeature-noha > scenario in virtual environment. We want to test SFC usecase using tacker > as VNF manager like you mentioned in the mail above, could you please guide > us to some documentation relating to this? > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Best Regards, > > Babu > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] > <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> on behalf of Brady Allen > Johnson <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 15, 2017 12:10:06 PM > *To:* Michail Polenchuk; [email protected]; [email protected] > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC agent for > SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation > > > Anton, > > I should have been a bit more explicit in my previous email. > > The SFC103/104 demos are intended for a stand-alone, Non-OpenStack (hence > no OPNFV needed) setup. Basically, they use vagrant to setup the necessary > VMs. These demos do *not* use Tacker. > > In an OPNFV deployment, there needs to be an entity that spins-up and > manages VMs for the SFC SFs, and ODL wont (and shouldnt) do that. This > functionality is called a VNF Manager. Tacker is a VNF Manager (and some > orchestration) as it does VNF management and orchestrates the SF VM info to > ODL SFC. If you dont use Tacker, and dont have another VNF Manager, then > you'll need to handle the VMs by hand, which is possible, but can be very > tedious. > > Regards, > > Brady > > -----Original Message----- > *From*: "Chivkunov, Anton" <[email protected] > <%22Chivkunov,%20anton%22%20%[email protected]%3e>> > *To*: Brady Allen Johnson <[email protected] > <brady%20allen%20johnson%20%[email protected]%3e>>, > Michail Polenchuk <[email protected] > <michail%20polenchuk%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] < > [email protected] <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>> > *Cc*: [email protected] <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists. > opnfv.org > <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e> > > > *Subject*: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC agent for > SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation > *Date*: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:35:45 +0000 > > Hi Brady. > > > > Thank you for your feedback! Yes, I saw demos 103/104 as well and the > reason why I interested in 101/102 instead is because they don’t use > Tacker, but 103/104 use it. > > Our current installation based on instruction http://artifacts.opnfv.org/ > sfc/review/20587/installationprocedure-single/index.html (5.2.4. Feature > configuration on existing Fuel), and this instruction didn’t contain > installation of Tacker plugin. Only next two are mentioned there: > > fuel plugins --install fuel-plugin-ovs-*.noarch.rpm > > fuel plugins --install opendaylight-*.noarch.rpm > > > > Therefore we have no Tacker installed currently. It is not big problem > (sure we can install Tacker), but this is the reason why we looked for the > way how to run SFC without Tacker. > > Meanwhile, we have setup with 3 Controller and 2 compute nodes. I’m > wondering if there are some significant difference in compare with VM setup > (we have no virtualbox & vagrant, which were used in SFC103)? > > > > BR/Anton. > > > > *From:* Brady Allen Johnson [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 15, 2017 12:22 PM > *To:* Michail Polenchuk; [email protected]; Chivkunov, Anton > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC agent for > SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation > > > > > > Anton, > > > > The SFC101 and 102 demos are outdated and no longer supported. Its best to > look at either the SFC103 or 104 demos. The sfc-agent is still used in > SFC103, but we will soon stop supporting it. > > > > The SFC103 demo is a great way to run and execute SFC in a single VM. If > you want to create SFs, SFFs, and classifiers in an OPNFV context, the best > would be to use Tacker. > > > > Regards, > > > > Brady > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > *From*: Michael Polenchuk <[email protected] > <michael%20polenchuk%20%[email protected]%3e>> > > *To*: "Chivkunov, Anton" <[email protected] > <%22Chivkunov,%20anton%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, Manuel Buil < > [email protected] <manuel%20buil%20%[email protected]%3e>> > > *Cc*: [email protected] <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists. > opnfv.org > <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e> > > > > *Subject*: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC agent for > SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation > > *Date*: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:45:46 +0400 > > > > Hi Anton, > > + Manuel > > I believe Manuel has more experience with SFC than me. > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Chivkunov, Anton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Michael. > > > > If I didn’t cross the limit yet, I want to ask one more question about > PlugIn J > > On SFC main page (https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Service_Function_ > Chaining:Main) there are several Demos available. Demos 101&102 describe > procedure of SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation (https://drive.google.com/ > file/d/0BzS_qWNqsnQbUnEzU3BqVzdueTQ/view). > > There mentioned that SFC agent have to be started on corresponding node > for this purpose. To start SFC agent there is special script > “start_agent.sh”. But in our installation, with ODL/SFC as Plugin, we have > no this script available. I’m wondering if we need just to load this script > from SFC repo and use it, or there is another method for > SFs/SFFs/Classifiers creation provided in environments, deployed by Fuel, > and we should use some other way to create SFs/SFFs/Classifiers? > > > > *Not 100% sure that this question is really related to plugin. If it is > not, then please sorry for this. > > > > BR/Anton. > > > > *From:* Chivkunov, Anton > *Sent:* Friday, March 03, 2017 11:20 AM > *To:* 'Michael Polenchuk' > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] HW requirements > for ODL Controller with SFC. > > > > Hi Michael. > > > > Thank you for advice! > > Currently we are trying to use our most powerful node (16Gb of RAM and > 4-cores CPU) for Openstack + ODL Controller. Also we requested additional > RAM for all 5 nodes, to have 16-32Gb on each. > > If it will not help we also will try with dedicated node for ODL > controller as you suggested. > > > > BR/Anton. > > > > *From:* Michael Polenchuk [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Friday, March 03, 2017 11:10 AM > *To:* Chivkunov, Anton > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] HW requirements > for ODL Controller with SFC. > > > > Hi Anton, > > Definitely the timeout and low performance caused by RAM capacity. I guess > you have a lot of processes in swap. > > I would recommend to dedicate one node to opendaylight controller since > 8Gb is actually ain't enough for openstack+odl. > > Also for the openstack controllers itself the minimum/required RAM is > ~10-11Gb. > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Chivkunov, Anton <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all. > > > > Sorry to bother you again, but we want to consult regarding HW > requirements for Controller node, which act as ODL controller as well. > > As it was described in initial mail, we have an environment, which consist > of Fuel master node, 3 Controller and 2 compute nodes. > > Controller nodes have 2-core Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-2100 CPUs. Two out of 3 > controllers have 8Gb of RAM, and one – 6 (not 16)Gb. ODL controller is one > of 8Gb nodes. > > > > Compute nodes have 16Gb RAM and next CPUs: > > Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU > > Intel(R) Core(TM) i3 CPU > > > > First of all, quite often during deployments in this configuration one or > few nodes can go away and back online: > Node 'Controller1 n103262' is back online > > Node 'Controller1 n103262' has gone away > > > > After such attempts part of functions are not operational and many tests > fails. > > When we are lucky and nodes were not away during deploy, most part of > tests works, only few of them may fail due to timeouts and work only after > several re-runs. > > At this step we are able to create/ping instances and so on, but as soon > as we install SFC UI and try do to something there everything breaks: > > - Existing instances are not pingable > > - New instances can’t be created due to error from > nova-scheduler (no hosts found) > > - CPU load on ODL controller becomes extremely high (up to > 100%) and even Controller restart doesn’t help > > - ODL controller goes away and back online in fuel time to time > > - SFC UI very-very slow > > > > I’m wondering if all these problems are due to low performance of our > node? In presentation from Luis Gomez I fount next table with requirements > and we are above minimum values: > > > > But I guess it might be for configurations without OpenStack and when ODL > work as PlugIn for Fuel/Openstack requirements should be higher? > > For example on http://artifacts.opnfv.org/pharos/docs/pharos-spec.html I > see that 32Gb and Intel Xeon E5-2600v2 Series (Ivy Bridge and newer, or > similar) are mentioned. > > > > Could you please confirm if our problems are really due to too low > performance of HW and if so, then which characteristics are recommended? > > > > Thank you in advance! > > BR/Anton. > > > > *From:* Chivkunov, Anton > *Sent:* Monday, February 20, 2017 11:28 AM > *To:* 'Michael Polenchuk' > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC UI > > > > Hi Michael. > > > > Ok, clear, thank you for clarifications! > > I’m really happy that we were able to get UI after installing > “feature:install odl-sfc-ui”, proposed by Pau. > > > > Thanks to both of you for quick response! > > > > BR/Anton. > > > > > > *From:* Michael Polenchuk [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Monday, February 20, 2017 10:51 AM > *To:* Chivkunov, Anton > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [fuel][plugins][odl] SFC UI > > > > Hi Anton, > > The patch is on review: > https://review.openstack.org/435878 > > > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Chivkunov, Anton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Just want to modify subject. > > > > *From:* Chivkunov, Anton > *Sent:* Friday, February 17, 2017 1:53 PM > *To:* '[email protected]' > *Subject:* [fuel][plugins][odl] > > > > Hi Experts! > > > > We have an environment, which consist of 3 Controller and 2 compute nodes, > where we would like to try SFC. > > Deployment was done using Fuel, with OpenDaylight (with SFC features) and > Openvswitch plugins installed. But after deployment in OpenDaylight DLUX > user interface we don’t have anything related to SFC. It refer us to page > like this (not …/sfc/index.html): > > > > When we try to open http://192.168.203.210:8181/*sfc/*index.htm > <http://192.168.203.210:8181/sfc/index.htm> manually, we getting error > (no such page) > > > > When I go to OpenDaylight shell on controller node, I see in the list of > installed features that next SFC-related features are installed: > > opendaylight-user@root>feature:list -i | grep -i sfc > > odl-ovsdb-sfc-api | 1.3.0-Boron | > x | odl-ovsdb-sfc-1.3.0-Boron | OpenDaylight :: > ovsdb-sfc :: api > > odl-ovsdb-sfc | 1.3.0-Boron | > x | odl-ovsdb-sfc-1.3.0-Boron | OpenDaylight :: > ovsdb-sfc > > odl-ovsdb-sfc-rest | 1.3.0-Boron | > x | odl-ovsdb-sfc-1.3.0-Boron | OpenDaylight :: > ovsdb-sfc :: REST > > odl-sfc-model | 0.3.0-Boron | > x | odl-sfc-0.3.0-Boron | OpenDaylight :: sfc :: > Model > > odl-sfc-provider | 0.3.0-Boron | > x | odl-sfc-0.3.0-Boron | OpenDaylight :: sfc :: > Provider > > odl-sfc-provider-rest | 0.3.0-Boron | > x | odl-sfc-0.3.0-Boron | OpenDaylight :: sfc :: > Provider > > odl-sfc-ovs | 0.3.0-Boron | > x | odl-sfc-0.3.0-Boron | OpenDaylight :: > OpenvSwitch > > odl-sfc-openflow-renderer | 0.3.0-Boron | > x | odl-sfc-0.3.0-Boron | OpenDaylight :: > sfc-openflow-renderer > > > > I’m wondering if we have to do some additional steps after Fuel deployment > with plugin to get SFC UI available? I was not able to find any instruction > for this part and supposed that OpenDaylight DLUX user interface will open > SFC UI. > > > > Thank you in advance! > > BR/Anton. > > > _______________________________________________ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > > > > -- > > Michael Polenchuk > Private Cloud / Mirantis Inc. > > > _______________________________________________ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > > > > -- > > Michael Polenchuk > Private Cloud / Mirantis Inc. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing > [email protected]https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
