* Jose A. Lopes <[email protected]> [2014-01-23 16:44:25 +0100]: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 04:30:23PM +0200, Dimitris Aragiorgis wrote: > > * Jose A. Lopes <[email protected]> [2014-01-23 10:21:03 +0100]: > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 04:48:04PM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > Comment #5 on issue 679 by [email protected]: Common issues > > > > documentation: gnt-network > > > > http://code.google.com/p/ganeti/issues/detail?id=679 > > > > > > > > The routing table is irrelevant to gnt-network. Ganeti uses > > > > nicparams inside the NIC object that include mode and link. In case > > > > mode is routed, link logically points to > > > > a routing table (same as if mode is bridged, link is a linux bridge). > > > > > > > > Any routing table (just like bridges) must pre-exist. In case mode > > > > is routed Ganeti only checks if the NIC has an IP. > > > > > > Sorry, I am a bit confused here. From what I understand, the routing > > > table is irrelevant, the link argument points to it, it must > > > pre-exist, but it's never checked by Ganeti. > > > > > > Is this correct? > > > > > > > Yes. The link (either routing table or bridge) passed to `gnt-network > > connect` is inherited by NIC objects that reside in the network. I said > > irrelevant because Ganeti *currently* does not check for routing table > > existence neither in gnt-network context (during add/connect) nor in > > gnt-instance context (--net 0:ip=1.2.3.4,mode=routed,link=rt1, > > --net 0:ip=pool,network=net1) > > > > > What I did was to create a 'gnt-network' with routed mode. I never > > > created the routing table and ganeti did not create one for me, at > > > least AFAIK. Does this sound right to you? > > > > > > > Yes, if by "right" you mean what is currently supported. Since Ganeti > > provides all the necessary info to hooks and scripts, I think Ganeti > > should not do any node configuration (create routing tables/bridges, > > etc). And IMHO the existing CheckInstanceBridgesExist() is something > > that should be removed since any bridge can be created on demand by > > kvm-ifup script and this check adds one more RPC during instance related > > operations.. > > I agree. > > Do you think it would me possible (or makes sense) to create a network > in routed mode without specifying a routing table at all?
No, I don't think this is the right approach. Ganeti, even before gnt-network, needed a value for the link option (see also Constantinos' comment on the issue). > Or the > routing table is passed to gnt-network in order to get to the NIC and > afterwards be passed to a hook script as an environment variable? > Exactly! If mode is routed, link is reasonable to be a routing table (default, or some other). Of course it can be something else that could be useful to external scripts, which are responsible to handle the link option. A NIC object should *always* have nicparams. If not explicitly defined, they get filled with the cluster's defaults. Having this in mind, nodegroup's netparams (both mode and link) will eventually be the NIC's nicparams as soon as it resides inside this network. Since nicparams are currently auto-filled, not passing a link to netparams would mean that NICs inside the same network could end up having different links after modifying cluster's default. I'll be sending the documentation requested by Guido and Michele with regard to gnt-network one of the next days and I believe it will make things a lot clearer. > > > > gnt-network defines netparams per nodegroup (during connect) > > > > which are the nicparams > > > > each network's NIC will inherit. To sum up setting up any routing > > > > rules (just like brctl commands) are kvm-ifup's responsibility. You > > > > can always create/destroy bridges and routing tables automatically > > > > using network related hooks too. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because this project is configured to send > > > > all issue notifications to this address. > > > > You may adjust your notification preferences at: > > > > https://code.google.com/hosting/settings > > > > > > -- > > > Jose Antonio Lopes > > > Ganeti Engineering > > > Google Germany GmbH > > > Dienerstr. 12, 80331, München > > > > > > Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 > > > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg > > > Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores > > > Steuernummer: 48/725/00206 > > > Umsatzsteueridentifikationsnummer: DE813741370 > > > > -- > Jose Antonio Lopes > Ganeti Engineering > Google Germany GmbH > Dienerstr. 12, 80331, München > > Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg > Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores > Steuernummer: 48/725/00206 > Umsatzsteueridentifikationsnummer: DE813741370
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
