On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:07 AM, Murali Reddy <murali.re...@citrix.com>wrote:
> On 26/04/13 7:17 AM, "Carlos Reategui" <car...@reategui.com> wrote: > >Security is not really an issue so if there is a setup option that would > >keep things simple I am all ears. > > Couple of more details would help. So your primary use case is to provide > a cloud for DevOps right? pretty much. What is that your use-case of using ELB? Our stuff eventually gets deployed on AWS so we want to try and simulate the ELB function as well as autoscale groups. At present in basic zone network services EIP & ELB are only available > through the NetScaler. If you want CloudStack to provision network > services static NAT (with EIP) and LB (with ELB) in basic zone then you > will have to use NetScaler. > Looking at NetScaler site, does it matter which of the platforms I go for (hw vs virtual) or how about the edition. Is standard ok? Are there some how-tos on setting it up with CS? The CS install and admin guides are a bit light in that section. >Using XS my understanding is I need to change it to bridge networking > >instead of ovs. I'm also assuming I still setup the bonds using xe (they > >seem to default to slb). Is it possible to use LACP? XS 6.0.2 does not > >support LACP but since I will using bridge networking I'm wondering if it > >might. Should the bonds have specific names or be labeled something > >specific? > > If security is not a concern and does not want security groups in basic > zone, then you could still use OVS. > Ok so when setting up my zone I should select: "DefaultSharedNetworkOffering". Can I later switch it to "DefaultSharedNetScalerEIPandELBNetworkOffering"? I think I am going to stick with bridge initially because I read somewhere that XS6.0.2 only supports 2 NIC bonds. I'm assuming that in bridge mode it should support more since it is the native linux bonding and I know it support several NICs per bond. >Would I be better off having a separate management network from the guest > >network? I.e. separating out that bond into 2 bonds? I'm assuming that > >would require setting up a vlan. Would I need to use advanced network > >too? > > I am a bit of a newbie when it comes to networks. > > In general you can do NIC bonding, traffic (guest,storage,management) > isolation is both advanced and basic zones. But if you want CloudStack to > orchestrate and provide network services (static/source NAT, PF, lb etc) > in self-service manner using virtual router then you can opt for advanced > zone. Not sure if I got all that, but I'll start with single bond for guest, management and secondary traffic and have a separate bond for the NFS primary traffic. I'll use the following IP ranges: 192.168.10.10-29: Reserved for host bond0 IPs. 192.168.10.30-59: CS Reserved System VMs 192.168.10.100-249: CS Guest Range. Does that seem reasonable? I have 6 Hosts for now. But downside of advanced zone is you will have to deal with VLAN's. > If network services are not important or you can provision network > services outside of CloudStack then basic-zone is the simplest deployment > model that that you should be using. > >
