There are some pretty strict quotas on the rate at which you can create and destroy networks. I think the current network-per-group idea doesn't scale well.
"A network performs the same function that a router does in a home network: it describes the network range and gateway IP address, handles communication between instances, and serves as a gateway between instances and callers outside the network. [...] Any communication between instances in different networks, even within the same project, must be through external IP addresses." [1] I think we should switch to using the default network and only creating a new network if the user specifies that is what they want. [1] https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/networking#networks_1 On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Andrea Turli <andrea.tu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Daniel, > > Is it a common use case to spin up more than 5 node groups on one project? > > > > I think in jclouds we should support the most generic case possible, not > only 5 node groups then. > > > > > If it is, we should not be creating one network per node group on GCE > > because there is quota of 5 networks per project. > > > > I am wondering why we create a new network for each group. Would it make > > more sense to use the default network for all groups and keep groups > > distinct by using tags and naming conventions? > > > > I think a network per node group makes sense for traffic segmentation and > multi tenancy but if you think it shouldn't be necessary I think it is good > to have your feedback here as you are the expert :) > Maybe we could keep going with this approach and make sure that the network > (and the firewall rules!) gets deleted when the node group is destroyed. > > I am still gaining familiarity with the compute abstraction. > > > > Best, > Andrea >