On 07/16/2013 06:46 PM, Ian Wells wrote:
On 17 July 2013 00:11, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Absolutely, that is what our tools team is now having to do. All I'm saying
is that this wasn't necessary in Folsom and wouldn't be necessary if the API
didn't force networks to be created with a tenant ID.
What's wrong with a shared network? It's been a while since I was the
one doing the network setup steps, but I believe you create, perhaps
with your admin user, a network with --shared, create a subnet for
that network, make sure it routes appropriately, and voila! There's
one network in the system and with no nova boot options (note: nova
boot doesn't need the subnet to get an address, anyway, though you can
explictly specify network) your VM will join all visible networks on
the system - being the one and only shared network.
There are certainly other deployment options, such as the
one-network-per-tenant model you seem to have in mind, but I think the
above one mirrors the nova-network style you're used to the closest.
The one-network-per-tenant model is what is used in VLAN networking with
nova-network and what we're trying to emulate here. That said, due to
the limitations in the Neutron API I've discussed here (not being able
to create a network with an assigned tenant ID), we have instead had to
go the route of having one giant shared network, creating a subnet at
tenant creation time for the tenant, and relying on net-ns overlapping
CIDRs.
Best,
-jay
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
