Hi Daniel,
The mechanism for isolating L2 traffic is at the vSwitch level – there is no
way to VLAN tag the at the NIC level for a VM in VMware. Your only other option
is therefore to VLAN tag at the guest OS level which adds security issues +
overhead, etc.
Regards,
Dag Sonstebo
Cloud Architect
ShapeBlue
On 15/08/2017, 13:05, "daniel.herrm...@zv.fraunhofer.de"
<daniel.herrm...@zv.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
Hi Dag,
thank you for your answer. As far as I know, the end user never has direct
access to the virtual router. I am not talking about adding a VLAN tag at the
user VM, only at the VPR, where the limit most likely comes into play when
creating a number of tiers in a VPC.
We could do both: normal VMs require one interface per tier/network, which
makes perfect sense. The router however could use VLAN tags at VM level, which
could remove the limitation of having a maximum number of tiers connected to
one VPC. It is only configured by CloudStack, the end user does not have access
to the VPR.
Regards
Daniel
Am 15.08.17, 13:27 schrieb "Dag Sonstebo" <dag.sonst...@shapeblue.com>:
Hi Daniel,
In theory that could work – but keep in mind we are working in a
multi-tenant environment, where guest isolation must be guaranteed, hence
cannot ever be exposed to normal users. The isolation method must be abstracted
from the end user VMs – otherwise you would have a potential security issue
where someone could tag traffic from their VM with someone else’s tag. Doing
tagging at VM level would also be a huge overhead.
As a result we VLAN tag at the vSwitch or bridge level – which end
users have no access to – the flipside of the coin being that this requires
separate NICs for each tier.
Regards,
Dag Sonstebo
Cloud Architect
ShapeBlue
On 15/08/2017, 11:07, "daniel.herrm...@zv.fraunhofer.de"
<daniel.herrm...@zv.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
Hi,
we are hitting the same limitation, except that we can use 10 NICs
on VMware.
The fact that we also use the Private Gateway functionality addes
another NIC, besides the management and outside NIC which is present as well.
I wonder that is the reason for one NIC per tier? Why not just use
one outside NIC, one management NIC and *one* NIC for the tiers, where the
VLANs (or whatever isolation method is used) is trunked, for example just using
subinterfaces and dot1Q tags? This would eliminate this limit for whatever
hypervisor that supports trunk to it’s guests (I know for sure about VMWare,
not so much about the other hypervisors).
Regards
Daniel
Am 15.08.17, 10:52 schrieb "Dag Sonstebo"
<dag.sonst...@shapeblue.com>:
Hi Dennis,
Any tier or network which is accessible and part of a VPC
requires an interface on the VPC Virtual Router.
What you can however do is create separate shared networks and
connect these as secondary networks to your VMs – these shared networks get
their own VR.
Regards,
Dag Sonstebo
Cloud Architect
ShapeBlue
On 15/08/2017, 09:19, "Dennis Meyer" <snooop...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi,
im using xenserver as hypervisor so im limited to 7 nic's /
vm, so the
router vm cant handle more than 7 nics which corresponds to
7 networks
inside a vpc. I had created some networks for different
drbd and corosync
stuff, they dont need a gateway, dhcp and a router vm. How
should a network
offering look like which dont creates a network on the
routervm but is
accessible by the vpc?
Snooops
dag.sonst...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
dag.sonst...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
dag.sonst...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
