Re: Static IP addressing? with Mellanox
Hi Ed You might want to look into abusing the mechanisms we provide to record additional MAC and IP addresses for containers on a machine. The machine (Juju really) tells MAAS to associate a particular MAC and IP address with that machine in a way which will then be garbage collected if the machine is repurposed later. I think the full fix must be to teach MAAS about Infiniband, which would mean: * the ephemeral image needs to have the necessary drivers to see it * we need to record it in the MAAS database as an infiniband device * we need to also record if you're going to do IPoverIB * the installation needs to set that up If you're up for this, we'll help steer the patches home. Otherwise, can put it on the list for 16.10. Mark On 17/11/15 01:40, ed bond wrote: > Hey All, > > Anyone able to help me figure out now to get static IP’s allocated per > machine for third party module required interfaces? > > I am using the mellanox support charm to give each of my physical machines an > IPoverIB interface. ( ib0 ) > > Is there a way for me to allow for a charm to write to > /etc/network/interfaces ? Or another solution? > > Should I be adding the Mac address of ib0 into MaaS even though it doesn’t > get picked up during configuration and that network is closed to MaaS? > > > When I set the IP address manually, my charms get stopped because I messed > with the config file. > 2015-11-17 06:16:32 INFO juju.networker networker.go:163 networker is > disabled - not starting on machine "machine-1" > 2015-11-17 06:16:32 INFO juju.worker runner.go:269 start > "authenticationworker" > > This is because I modified the /etc/network/interfaces according to the code > I looked into. > > What is the “Proper” Way to set up these interfaces so I can have a 54G > backend for ceph / neutron? > > > The charm info I am using is: > mellanox: > charm: "cs:trusty/mellanox-2" > options: > "accept-mellanox-license": true > md5sum: 5868da099e1c6a157a182898a4fb720b > "ofed-file": "MLNX_OFED_LINUX-3.1-1.0.3-ubuntu14.04-x86_64.tgz" > > > Thanks in advance. > > > - Firl > > > > > > -- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
Re: Static IP addressing? with Mellanox
On 17/11/15 10:38, ed bond wrote: > I honestly think ceph/neutron having RDMA support would be more > important. I figured I could hack together IPoIB quicker since it was an > Operating System layer and not changing all the Open Stack charms. I believe this work is in progress between Mellanox and Canonical. Mark -- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
Re: Static IP addressing? with Mellanox
Indeed, the IPoIB is part of the Mellanox charm work, as well as the driver work underneath it all. We are also pursuing Ceph/RDMA with Mellanox and I'm sure it will also appear in our Intel relationship. charms are available at https://code.launchpad.net/~mellanox-canonical Thanks and Regards, Narinder Gupta (PMP) narinder.gu...@canonical.com Canonical, Ltd.narindergupta [irc.freenode.net] +1.281.736.5150narindergupta2007[skype] Ubuntu- Linux for human beings | www.ubuntu.com | www.canonical.com On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Mark Shuttleworthwrote: > On 17/11/15 10:38, ed bond wrote: > > I honestly think ceph/neutron having RDMA support would be more > important. I figured I could hack together IPoIB quicker since it was an > Operating System layer and not changing all the Open Stack charms. > > I believe this work is in progress between Mellanox and Canonical. > > Mark > > -- > Juju mailing list > Juju@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju > -- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju