Hi, for each compute node to have SNAT to Internet, I think we have the drawbacks: 1. SNAT is done in router, so each router will have to consume one public IP on each compute node, which is money. 2. for each compute node to go out to Internet, the compute node will have one more NIC, which connect to physical switch, which is money too
So personally, I like the design: floating IPs and 1:N SNAT still use current network nodes, which will have HA solution enabled and we can have many l3 agents to host routers. but normal east/west traffic across compute nodes can use DVR. yong sheng gong On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Zang MingJie <zealot0...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi: > > In current DVR design, SNAT is north/south direction, but packets have > to go west/east through the network node. If every compute node is > assigned a public ip, is it technically able to improve SNAT packets > w/o going through the network node ? > > SNAT versus floating ips, can save tons of public ips, in trade of > introducing a single failure point, and limiting the bandwidth of the > network node. If the SNAT performance problem can be solved, I'll > encourage people to use SNAT over floating ips. unless the VM is > serving a public service > > -- > Zang MingJie > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev