[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4967?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13807806#comment-13807806
]
Yoshikazu Nojima commented on CLOUDSTACK-4967:
----------------------------------------------
1) allows traffic label for guest networks to be the actual eth/bond device if
desired
This seems nice. I'm not sure why a bridge name was required as traffice label
(from some historical reason?), but this change seems useful.
2) changes bridge name for vxlan to be brvx- as mentioned
I think VNI address space is large enough to be sliced for multiple guest
networks,
the restriction that guest networks cannnot reuse same VNI seems acceptable.
But enforcing not same VNI be used for is a problem to be solved.
> vxlan doesn't scale
> -------------------
>
> Key: CLOUDSTACK-4967
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4967
> Project: CloudStack
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the
> default.)
> Components: KVM
> Affects Versions: 4.3.0
> Reporter: Marcus Sorensen
> Assignee: Yoshikazu Nojima
> Fix For: 4.3.0
>
>
> com.cloud.exception.InternalErrorException: Failed to create vnet 987529:
> inet 172.17.10.10/24 brd 172.17.10.255 scope global cloudbr0Error: an inet
> prefix is expected rather than "239.15.3857.137".Error
> It looks like the vxlan implementation doesn't scale correctly with vxlan's
> capabilities. The VNI is supposed to be up to 24 bits (16777216), it should
> be possible to use high VNI numbers. The script 'modifyvxlan.sh' seems to do
> this:
> local mcastGrp="239.$(( $vxlanId >> 16 % 256 )).$(( $vxlanId >> 8 % 256
> )).$(( $vxlanId % 256 ))"
> $vlanid >> 8 %256 (and similar) may need to be ($vxlanId >> 8) % 256
> On a less important note, I should point out that the bridge naming
> convention will break in certain rare situations. The max size of a bridge
> device name is 15 characters. For bond devices, a VNI above 10 million will
> not fit, e.g. "brbond0-16000000", or ethernet devices above 10
> "breth10-16000000". However, these may be quite rare, and changing the
> naming convention as we found in 4.2 is a bit painful if it can't be done in
> a backward compatible way. My first thought was to have vxlan and vxlan only
> use hex for it's VNI, that might be ok since it's never been released yet.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
