+1
It is also much better if CS supports adding multiple rules in one request.



2013/7/23 Nguyen Anh Tu <ng.t...@gmail.com>

> Just still thinking about the incremental applying solution...
>
> +1 for writing rules to file.
>
>
> 2013/7/23 Alex Huang <alex.hu...@citrix.com>
>
> > The file approach will definitely make it faster.
> >
> > Just thinking out loud, If we can write all of the rules on a file, why
> > not do an iptables-save, perform a diff and apply the difference?
> >
> > --Alex
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 5:08 AM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Cc: Nguyen Anh Tu
> > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Apply rules on Virtual Router
> > >
> > > It is quite hard to do a delta update correctly, so a complete rewrite
> > of the
> > > ruleset is the safest way to do it. Not sure why it is "slow", but I'd
> > compare it
> > > to the time taken to start a VM.
> > > One way to make it slightly faster is to write the ruleset to a file
> and
> > use
> > > iptables-restore from the file.
> > >
> > > On 7/23/13 5:22 PM, "Nguyen Anh Tu" <ng.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Anyone?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >2013/7/22 Nguyen Anh Tu <ng.t...@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > >> Hi guys,
> > > >>
> > > >> While working with L3 network services, I found a problem in the
> > > >>process  of applying iptables rules. It currently works not good in
> my
> > > opinion.
> > > >>When
> > > >> you apply a new rule (eg. StaticNat or Egress rule), Virtual Router
> > > >>backups  old rules and re-apply all of non-revoked rules related to
> > > >>source IP on the  new rule, including this one. It causes a slow,
> > > >>especially when you have a  lot of running rules. When you delete a
> > > >>rule, the process happens in the  same. The deleting rule is marked
> as
> > > >>"revoked", so it doesn't appear in the  list. I think we should have
> a
> > > >>better approach.
> > > >>
> > > >> Any idea?
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >> N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >
> > > >N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U
>

Reply via email to