Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-10-04 Thread Benoit ML
Hello, I'm permit to ask you, what's your network architecture ? How many tunnel ? Did you do a mesh ? centralised Vswitch ? And last but not least, how do you do commutation between physical and virtual world ? ;) For know, here, we have a centralised Vswitch : - commutation between p

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-10-01 Thread Joseph Glanville
I am using OVS to build logically seperated Layer 2 networks over the top of a Layer 3 network using GRE tunnels to create a fully connected mesh for each network. This works perfectly and is very scalable. I have had no issues creating pretty obscene numbers of GRE tunnels on a single host. With

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-08 Thread Justin Pettit
>From "lib/mac-learning.h": #define MAC_MAX 2048 --Justin On Sep 7, 2011, at 11:57 PM, sachin sharma wrote: > Hi Justin, > > In your reply to scalability question, you answered that we can modify the > limit of 2K MAC addresses to any value by changing a #define at openvswitch > cod

[ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-07 Thread sachin sharma
Hi Justin, In your reply to scalability question, you answered that we can modify the limit of 2K MAC addresses to any value by changing a #define at openvswitch code.  Can you please let me know the file name where I can modify this limit? Thanks & Regards,Sachin Sharma >     ? What is the sca

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-07 Thread Justin Pettit
The plan is to support both models. --Justin On Sep 7, 2011, at 10:54 PM, Holger Winkelmann wrote: > Sounds good to me too. To clarify, you 'just' Plan to support the > encapsulation format and control will be still the OF controller ? > > -- > > Holger Winkelmann > Travelping GmbH > +49-171

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-07 Thread Holger Winkelmann
Sounds good to me too. To clarify, you 'just' Plan to support the encapsulation format and control will be still the OF controller ? -- Holger Winkelmann Travelping GmbH +49-171-5594745 On 08.09.2011, at 07:36, Justin Pettit wrote: > Right, I agree. I was just referring to the ability to use

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-07 Thread Justin Pettit
Right, I agree. I was just referring to the ability to use its UDP tunneling format to get through devices that don't like GRE. We're also planning to support a mode where VXLAN is a virtual port, like GRE, and traffic that is sent out it will be encapsulated (and decapsulated on receive). --

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-07 Thread Martin Casado
Yeah, I think that's right. Of course, Open vSwitch will be able to support both eventually. But for large deployments, managing the edge MAC tables, as well as tunneling and tagging rules (and any other filtering or QoS policy) will almost certainly require a centralized component. Also, as

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-07 Thread Nicky Fatr
Yes, VXLAN tunnel header is a good proposal, but for control plane there is serve limitation: it depend on physical network multicast for MAC learning. In OVS, central ovsdb controlled MAC address propagation is a better choice. On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Justin Pettit wrote: > On Sep 7, 201

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-07 Thread Justin Pettit
On Sep 7, 2011, at 9:01 AM, Nicky Fatr wrote: > I don't think that TRILL/802.1AQ L2 over L2 is a good option for large > scale deployment. L2 over L3 instead is more scalable, eliminating > comlexity of physical network. > > maybe we can expect L2 over UDP in some future release, for UDP is > mor

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-07 Thread Nicky Fatr
I don't think that TRILL/802.1AQ L2 over L2 is a good option for large scale deployment. L2 over L3 instead is more scalable, eliminating comlexity of physical network. maybe we can expect L2 over UDP in some future release, for UDP is more friendly than GRE in some networking configuration. On

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-06 Thread Justin Pettit
Thanks for the detailed write-up. I agree with what you've said earlier, so I'll strip this down to your essential questions: > • What is the scalability of a large OVS deployment and what > abstraction measures are taken to avoid the “virtual” domain having CAM > exhaustion risks on the

Re: [ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-02 Thread Benoit ML
Hello, I've the same kind of question ... Moreover most of physical switch doesn't support more than 1024 Vlan... Idealy, I'm thinking about a new approach : Build a virtual mesh network between hypervisor and use Openvswitch (VM Connectivity) and openflow (deal with network flow) If you know a

[ovs-discuss] Scalability Questions in High-Density Virtualisation Environments

2011-09-01 Thread Leland Vandervort
Hi All, I have a couple of questions concerning the scalability of OVS when used in high-density virtualisation environments. To elaborate futher, a bit of background. Most virtualisation implementations do not go far enough in reality to abstract the virtual from the physical network environme