btzq opened a new issue, #9144:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/9144
<!--
Verify first that your issue/request is not already reported on GitHub.
Also test if the latest release and main branch are affected too.
Always add information AFTER of these HTML comments, but no need to delete
the comments.
-->
##### ISSUE TYPE
<!-- Pick one below and delete the rest -->
* Enhancement Request
##### COMPONENT NAME
<!--
Categorize the issue, e.g. API, VR, VPN, UI, etc.
-->
~~~
L2 Networks, Autoscaling
~~~
##### CLOUDSTACK VERSION
<!--
New line separated list of affected versions, commit ID for issues on main
branch.
-->
~~~
4.19.0
~~~
##### CONFIGURATION
<!--
Information about the configuration if relevant, e.g. basic network,
advanced networking, etc. N/A otherwise
-->
##### OS / ENVIRONMENT
<!--
Information about the environment if relevant, N/A otherwise
-->
##### SUMMARY
<!-- Explain the problem/feature briefly -->
Autoscaling was introduce few months ago and so far it works well.
However in more enterprise environments, Autoscale is usually required for
web servers, which needs a layer of security applicance in the front to prevent
the service from being exposed to vulnerabilities.
VNF Appliances have been introduced in Cloudstack which allows users to
bring in their own Virtual Network Appliances (eg. PFsense, FortigateVM) to
help with this. But these work effectively only in a L2 Environment, because if
it was used in a normal VPC, the default gateway for all VMs would be the
Virtual Router, hence bypassing the VNF altogether.
As a cloud provider, looking to service enterprise customers, id like to be
able to use both autoscaling and VNF appliances together. Hence, am wondering
if it is possible to enhance the virtual router to forward specified traffic
(based on specific rules eg. CIDR, Private IPs) to a specified VNF hosted
within the VPC. Then, the VNF would be configured to handle the
'filtering/firewalling' and other sort of functions that the VNF is responsible
to handle. And once done, it will route the traffic back to the Virtual Router.
This method would not only solve the autoscaling issue, but would solve the
issue in general where customers cant filter their traffic to the
internet/virtual router if using a VPC. Also would solve the pain of using ACL
Lists right now, where if a VPC has a large number of networks, ACL rules are
too tedious to manage. This would be made much easier with a VNF.
Just ideas, may sound crazy, open for discussion.
##### STEPS TO REPRODUCE
<!--
For bugs, show exactly how to reproduce the problem, using a minimal
test-case. Use Screenshots if accurate.
For new features, show how the feature would be used.
-->
<!-- Paste example playbooks or commands between quotes below -->
~~~
~~~
<!-- You can also paste gist.github.com links for larger files -->
##### EXPECTED RESULTS
<!-- What did you expect to happen when running the steps above? -->
~~~
To be able to use VNFs together with Autoscaling Function.
~~~
##### ACTUAL RESULTS
<!-- What actually happened? -->
<!-- Paste verbatim command output between quotes below -->
~~~
VNF is only available for L2 Networks. If VNF is used for VPC, every single
VM would need to be configure to use the VNF as the default gateway, which is a
tedious approach for cloud. (Feels like going back to on prem practices)
~~~
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
