On Aug 26, 2013, at 9:39 PM, Yongsheng Gong <gong...@unitedstack.com> wrote:

> First 'be like nova-network' is a merit for some deployments.

I'm afraid 'merit' is a bit vague for me.  Would you please elaborate?
 

> second, To allow admin to decide which network will be multihosted at runtime 
> will enable the neutron to continue using the current network node (dhcp 
> agent) mode at the same time.

If multi-host and non- multi-host networks are permitted to co-exist (because 
configuration is per-network), won't compute nodes have to be allowed to be 
heterogenous (some multi-host capable, some not)?  And won't Nova then need to 
schedule VMs configured with multi-host networks on compatible nodes?  I don't 
recall mention of this issue in the blueprint or design doc, and would 
appreciate pointers to where this decision was documented.


> 
> If we force the network multihosted when the configuration enable_multihost 
> is true, and then administrator wants to transfer to normal neutron way, 
> he/she must modify the configuration item and then restart.

I'm afraid I don't follow - are you suggesting that configuring multi-host 
globally will be harder on admins than the change under review?  Switching to 
non multi-host under the current proposal involves reconfiguring and restarting 
of an awful lot of agents, to say nothing of the db changes.


m. 


> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Maru Newby <ma...@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> On Aug 26, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Edgar Magana <emag...@plumgrid.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Developers,
> >
> > Let me explain my point of view on this topic and please share your 
> > thoughts in order to merge this new feature ASAP.
> >
> > My understanding is that multi-host is nova-network HA  and we are 
> > implementing this bp 
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/quantum-multihost for the 
> > same reason.
> > So, If in neutron configuration admin enables multi-host:
> > etc/dhcp_agent.ini
> >
> > # Support multi host networks
> > # enable_multihost = False
> >
> > Why do tenants needs to be aware of this? They should just create networks 
> > in the way they normally do and not by adding the "multihost" extension.
> 
> I was pretty confused until I looked at the nova-network HA doc [1].  The 
> proposed design would seem to emulate nova-network's multi-host HA option, 
> where it was necessary to both run nova-network on every compute node and 
> create a network explicitly as multi-host.  I'm not sure why nova-network was 
> implemented in this way, since it would appear that multi-host is basically 
> all-or-nothing.  Once nova-network services are running on every compute 
> node, what does it mean to create a network that is not multi-host?
> 
> So, to Edgar's question - is there a reason other than 'be like nova-network' 
> for requiring neutron multi-host to be configured per-network?
> 
> 
> m.
> 
> 1: 
> http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/admin/content/existing-ha-networking-options.html
> 
> 
> > I could be totally wrong and crazy, so please provide some feedback.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Edgar
> >
> >
> > From: Yongsheng Gong <gong...@unitedstack.com>
> > Date: Monday, August 26, 2013 2:58 PM
> > To: "Kyle Mestery (kmestery)" <kmest...@cisco.com>, Aaron Rosen 
> > <aro...@nicira.com>, Armando Migliaccio <amigliac...@vmware.com>, Akihiro 
> > MOTOKI <amot...@gmail.com>, Edgar Magana <emag...@plumgrid.com>, Maru Newby 
> > <ma...@redhat.com>, Nachi Ueno <na...@nttmcl.com>, Salvatore Orlando 
> > <sorla...@nicira.com>, Sumit Naiksatam <sumit.naiksa...@bigswitch.com>, 
> > Mark McClain <mark.mccl...@dreamhost.com>, Gary Kotton 
> > <gkot...@vmware.com>, Robert Kukura <rkuk...@redhat.com>
> > Cc: OpenStack List <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> > Subject: Re: About multihost patch review
> >
> > Hi,
> > Edgar Magana has commented to say:
> > 'This is the part that for me is confusing and I will need some 
> > clarification from the community. Do we expect to have the multi-host 
> > feature as an extension or something that will natural work as long as the 
> > deployment include more than one Network Node. In my opinion, Neutron 
> > deployments with more than one Network Node by default should call DHCP 
> > agents in all those nodes without the need to use an extension. If the 
> > community has decided to do this by extensions, then I am fine' at
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/37919/11/neutron/extensions/multihostnetwork.py
> >
> > I have commented back, what is your opinion about it?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yong Sheng Gong
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) 
> > <kmest...@cisco.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Yong:
> >>
> >> I'll review this and try it out today.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Kyle
> >>
> >> On Aug 15, 2013, at 10:01 PM, Yongsheng Gong <gong...@unitedstack.com> 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > The multihost patch is there for a long long time, can someone help to 
> >> > review?
> >> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/37919/
> >>
> >
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to