> Appropriate bug is filed in Launchpad > https://bugs.launchpad.net/opencontrail/+bug/1702856<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugs.launchpad.net%2Fopencontrail%2F%2Bbug%2F1702856&data=02%7C01%7Crovanleeuwen%40ebay.com%7Cc4f63dd7ec5f47ad230508d4f384d309%7C46326bff992841a0baca17c16c94ea99%7C0%7C0%7C636401199178329242&sdata=FkHFpcSQmXIs1bNSIDjZn%2BXwaQ%2BgUM9q0HeHZtEsKD4%3D&reserved=0> >
>This behaviour does not look correct, but due to architecture statement >(https://github.com/Juniper/contrail-controller/wiki/DNS-and-IPAM<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FJuniper%2Fcontrail-controller%2Fwiki%2FDNS-and-IPAM&data=02%7C01%7Crovanleeuwen%40ebay.com%7Cc4f63dd7ec5f47ad230508d4f384d309%7C46326bff992841a0baca17c16c94ea99%7C0%7C0%7C636401199178329242&sdata=%2FdAb1PZWkSIsWmCVkXiIX4dwrzSXbjv4%2FJt%2Bvwys1aE%3D&reserved=0>) > that name of DNS record is actual name of VM server can’t handle this >situation. So two questions are in my mind > > 1 - Is there any possibility to extend DNS record name in respect to “other” > parameters in such way to avoid situation above? > 2 - Is there any need to create additional handling for situation above? > Since it’s pretty narrow case I wonder if it makes sense to add extensions to > agent/server behaviour. We filed a ticket with Juniper a while ago about this. Below is the last info I have about it, we switched to designate so I closed the case after that: Current Status: The issue is reproduced and reported to developers in LP#1671870. Next Action: We have to carry the the information in each DNS record as to which compute the VM was spawned. Engineering will fix it in release 4.0. Cheers, Robert
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.opencontrail.org http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org
