Excerpts from Ken D'Ambrosio's message of 2016-01-28 12:39:01 -0800: > Hey, all. Trying to have geographically-dispersed legs to a ~60 node > liberty development cloud. Based on the traffic I see back and forth on > our icehouse cloud, it makes me think that having a cell hierarchy for > the new cloud might cut down on the back-and-forth chatter -- which > would be good, as I don't want to be yelled at by the network team. > However, I see in the docs that it's been listed as "experimental" since > Juno, and three releases of "experimental" makes me wonder if it's > actually moving anywhere, and something I should even consider using, or > if I should use a different approach altogether (suggestions welcome).
OpenStack isn't designed to spread out a single "region" over high latency, expensive WAN links. You may want to split into two regions if your facilities are far enough apart that they can't send quite a lot of traffic between them. However, if you have some requirement to have everything under that one region, I can say that even in a 1000 hypervisor simulation I don't see more than 100Mbit of traffic to the control plane that all of the nodes share. I'd expect 30 nodes to be quite a bit less traffic. So at that point the only extra traffic I'd expect to see would be north/south traffic where the router is scheduled on one side of the link, and the vms are on the other. You could also have a shared provider network for external access, but you'd need to do some tricks to make that work across an L3 link. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack