SDN is more or less an alternative for vlans, which he doesn't want to use anyway. He has separate network segments already.
There isn't very much good documentation for cloudstack networking. I wanted to do something similar a few months back and ended up frustrated. I had vlans, but wanted my VMS to have a public interface on a shared network and a private interface on a shared network. In the GUI, you can only do isolated networks in advanced mode. Once I realized that I had to create my network through the API I realized that I could do pretty much whatever I wanted with advanced networking. Outback Dingo, you should be able to do what you want by explicitly setting the traffic labels to the bridge devices you want. Cloudstack *should* then forego trying to create a new tagged interface and bridge. You will have to also create a new shared networking offering through the api that only provides DHCP and userdata. Then create a new network with that offering, and VMs attached to that will work on your shared network. I know these are vague instructions but I'm away from the PC. On Aug 7, 2012 6:40 PM, "Kevin Kluge" <kevin.kl...@citrix.com> wrote: > You can use SDN (Software Defined Networking). Salvatore sent some mails > about the work he had done which got to a beta state. It sets up zone-wide > L2 overlay networks using GRE tunnels. Salvatore's work was XenServer > specific and used a controller native to CloudStack. Hugo has done some > commits on Nicira NVP integration as well. SDN is bleeding edge for > CloudStack now but is an interesting future direction. Would be great to > get some feedback on these features. > > -kevin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Outback Dingo [mailto:outbackdi...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 4:29 PM > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > Subject: VLANS in Advance Networking NOT NEEDED. > > > > Just a curiosity, wonder if there way any way to allow advanced > networking > > without using VLANS I get the security concept, though i question their > use in > > certain configurations and that not everyone can afford the high end > > switches required to maintain a VLAN network. > > Simply put, we should be > > given a choice. I can configure XCP / XEN hosts to do exactly what i want > > without cloudstack, by giving all VMs dual interfaces one for public and > one > > for private without issues. As soon as I put CS in the mix I am forced > to use > > vlans in my configuration which my current network topology doesnt > > support. and yes, I have two separate physical network segments, so i > > question why i need vlans in the first place as im not running public > address > > space and private address space over the same physical network, so why > > does CS limit various hypervisors usage by forcing vlan topologies >
