> On Feb 7, 2018, at 5:11 PM, Mohamed Abdel Metaal <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Luis,
>  
> This could not be possible as all controllers in this case will connect to 
> the same openflow ports, RESTCONF, Jolokia ports 8081 and 8080 along with 
> other ports too, so the other 2 controllers will address ports which is 
> already being addressed by the first controller. It would only be possible to 
> work if these ports are changed in each of the other controllers so they 
> don’t collide using the same ports, eg. Openflow ports 6633 / 6653. Just to 
> clarify, as I have forgot, I am implementing this using my Ubuntu machine 
> without the use of virtual machines. That’s another question, could this be 
> implemented using only my local machine without virtual machines and tweaking 
> the ports in each OpenDaylight folder (for each controller)?

I do not think you can bring more than one controller instance in same machine 
unless you use VMs or docker. on both options you do not need to modify 
controller ports.

>  
> Jamo,
>  
> I am currently implementing the controllers in one machine so they have the 
> same address to address the controllers (which is the loopback address in my 
> case). So the controllers in my mininet script have the same ip address but 
> different openflow ports 6653, 7753 and 8853. Again, probably the same 
> question arises, is multiple controllers only possible to implement using 
> different virtual machines per controller?
>  
> Thanks 😊
>  
> P.S. I have implemented the same implementation before using Floodlight and 
> there was a certain number of ports, including openflow ports, that needs to 
> be changed. All using my local machine without the need for virtual machines.
> If this is possible then it could be also a great idea to benchmark 
> OpenDaylight with other SDN controllers for behavior using a physically 
> distributed control plane.
>  
>  
> From: Jamo Luhrsen <mailto:[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 1:53
> To: Luis Gomez <mailto:[email protected]>; Mohamed Abdel Metaal 
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; 
> openflowplugin-dev <mailto:[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [OpenDaylight Discuss] Multiple Controller implementation
>  
> 
> 
> On 2/7/18 4:24 PM, Luis Gomez wrote:
> > 
> >> On Feb 7, 2018, at 4:09 PM, Mohamed Abdel Metaal <[email protected] 
> >> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] 
> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Jamo,
> >>
> >> Yes exactly, I have one instance of mininet running that should be 
> >> connected to 3 opendaylight controllers. In my
> >> mininet python script i have defined that controllers should connect on 
> >> 6653, 7753 and 8853 openflow ports. This
> >> should be somehow configured also in my opendaylight controllers for it to 
> >> connect. I have tried changing port numbers
> >> in default(and legacy)-openflow-connection-config.xml for the 3 different 
> >> opendaylight controllers and ports 8081/8080
> >> for jetty.xml so they don’t collide but still I get the errors and the 2 
> >> other controllers cannot connect to my
> >> mininet instance.
> 
> Luis,
> 
> is there a config we can tweak to tell OFP which port to listen on?
> 
> Mohamed
> 
> can you tweak your mininet python script to use the actual ip addresses of 
> your
> controllers? seems that those would be different. In that case, why can't they
> all be listening on 6633?
> 
> Thanks,
> JamO
> 
> 
> >> As a brief example just to make sure that my idea is clear: i run a 
> >> mininet instance of 6 switches where each
> >> controller should only see/monitor/connect to 2 of the switches.
> > 
> > I am not sure I full follow here: is this as simple as connect 2 switches 
> > to a first controller, the next 2 switches to
> > a second controller and finally the last 2 switches to a third controller? 
> > if so there is nothing to do in controller,
> > juts need to set mininet or OVS to do this, right?
> > 
> >>
> >> Thank you for your response.
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> *From:* Jamo Luhrsen <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
> >> *Sent:* Thursday, February 8, 2018 12:57:26 AM
> >> *To:* Mohamed Abdel Metaal; [email protected] 
> >> <mailto:[email protected]> 
> >> <mailto:[email protected] 
> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>; openflowplugin-dev
> >> *Subject:* Re: [OpenDaylight Discuss] Multiple Controller implementation
> >>  
> >> adding the openflowplugin-dev list here as well.
> >>
> >> Mohamed,
> >>
> >> I don't get the impression that your OpenDaylight controllers are in a 
> >> clustering
> >> setup. Is that correct?
> >>
> >> I'm not totally following what you are trying to accomplish. You have just 
> >> one
> >> mininet instance connecting to a single IP address, but you want the 
> >> switches
> >> in that single mininet instance to somehow be distributed across multiple 
> >> (3)
> >> OpenDaylight controllers?
> >>
> >> Can you elaborate a little more please?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> JamO
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2/7/18 3:38 PM, Mohamed Abdel Metaal wrote:
> >> > I have a question regarding the implementation of multiple controllers 
> >> > using OpenDaylight.
> >> > If I want to implement 3 controllers, each responsible for a certain 
> >> > number of nodes in the topology (so we have 3
> >> > domains) which are not overlapping, how can this be implemented? I have 
> >> > experience with Floodlight controllers and I
> >> > could implement this by changing openflow port number along with other 
> >> > ports in some properties file but in OpenDaylight
> >> > I always get errors when I run 3 instances of controllers and only the 
> >> > first one gets connected to Mininet topology that
> >> > I implement with the controllers defined.
> >> > 
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Discuss mailing list
> >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
> >> > <mailto:[email protected] 
> >> > <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >> > https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.opendaylight.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C78feb80f3d6445ffa54e08d56e868b68%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636536446494956220&sdata=YmTHBgBPJ%2FwVvUGrRMBJQOV5NeQME55c%2B2%2B11K873Vs%3D&reserved=0
> >> >  
> >> > <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.opendaylight.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C78feb80f3d6445ffa54e08d56e868b68%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636536446494956220&sdata=YmTHBgBPJ%2FwVvUGrRMBJQOV5NeQME55c%2B2%2B11K873Vs%3D&reserved=0>
> >> > 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Discuss mailing list
> >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
> >> <mailto:[email protected] 
> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.opendaylight.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C18902b9c9a974bf9beef08d56e8e5c40%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636536480064728503&sdata=4kOUr9WN9Xn81XIYb0IPpaDX9Jk4XYzVbAEgKEr4qJY%3D&reserved=0
> >>  
> >> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.opendaylight.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdiscuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C18902b9c9a974bf9beef08d56e8e5c40%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636536480064728503&sdata=4kOUr9WN9Xn81XIYb0IPpaDX9Jk4XYzVbAEgKEr4qJY%3D&reserved=0>
> > 
>  

_______________________________________________
openflowplugin-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev

Reply via email to