Thanks Somesh, first option also seems most logical to me. I guess you wouldn't consider doing nic bonding and then vlans with some QoS based on vlans on switch level?
Thx again Sent from Google Nexus 4 On Dec 26, 2014 9:48 PM, "Somesh Naidu" <somesh.na...@citrix.com> wrote: > I generally prefer to keep the storage traffic separate. Reason is that > storage performance (provision templates to primary, snapshots, copy > templates, etc) significantly impact end user experience. In addition, it > also helps isolate network issues when troubleshooting. > > So I'd go for one of the following in that order: > Case I > 1G = mgmt network (only mgmt) > 10G = Primary and Secondary storage traffic > 10G = Guest and Public traffic > > Case II > 10G = Primary and Secondary storage traffic > 10G = mgmt network, Guest and Public traffic > > Case III > 10G = mgmt network, Primary and Secondary storage traffic > 10G = Guest and Public traffic > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, December 26, 2014 10:06 AM > To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Physical network design options - which crime to comit > > Hi folks, > > I'm designing some stuff - and wondering which crime to commit - I have 2 > posible scenarios in my head > I have folowing NICs available on compute nodes: > 1 x 1G NIC > 2 x 10G NIC > > I was wondering which approach would be better, as I', thinking about 2 > possible sollutions at the moment, maybe 3. > > *First scenario:* > > 1G = mgmt network (only mgmt) > 10G = Primary and Secondary storage traffic > 10G = Guest and Public traffic > > > *Second scenario* > > 1G = not used at all > 10G = mgmt,primary,secondary storage > 10G = Guest and Public > > > And possibly a 3rd scenario: > > 1G = not used at all > 10G = mgmt+primary storage > 10G = secondary storage, guest,public network > > > I could continue here with different scenarios - but I'm wondering if 1G > dedicated for mgmt would make sense - I know it is "better" to have it > dedicated if possible, but folowing "KISS" and knowing it's extremely light > weight traffic - I was thinkin puting everything on 2 x 10G interfaces. > > Any opinions are most welcome. > Thanks, > > > -- > > Andrija Panić >
