Hello, Thanks for link to this patch. It should solve my current need :)
-- Pozdrawiam Sławek Kapłoński sla...@kaplonski.pl Dnia Fri, 23 May 2014 15:23:49 +0100 Salvatore Orlando <sorla...@nicira.com> napisał: > Hi Jack, > > Do you mean this change by any chance? > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/77043/ > > Salvatore > > > On 23 May 2014 15:10, McCann, Jack <jack.mcc...@hp.com> wrote: > > > From the original ask: > > > > > > > > > I know that there is possibility to create port with IP > > > and later connect VM to this port. This solution is almost ok > > > for me but problem is when user delete this instance - then > > > port is also deleted and it is not reserved still for the same > > > user and tenant. > > > > > > > > This sounds like the problem of nova deleting a port that it did not > > > > create. We could look at a change (likely involving nova and > > neutron) > > > > such that if I create a port and pass it in to nova boot, nova would > > > > not delete that port when the VM is deleted. > > > > > > > > - Jack > > > > > > > > *From:* Mohammad Banikazemi [mailto:m...@us.ibm.com] > > *Sent:* Thursday, May 22, 2014 10:41 PM > > > > *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > *Cc:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > > > *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] reservation of fixed ip > > > > > > > > Well, for a use case we had in mind we were trying to figure out > > how to simply get an IP address on a subnet. We essentially want to > > use such an address internally by the controller and make sure it > > is not used for a port that gets created on a network with that > > subnet. In this use case, an interface to IPAM for removing an > > address from the pool of available addresses (and the interface to > > possibly return the address to the pool) would be sufficient. > > > > Mohammad > > > > [image: Inactive hide details for Carl Baldwin ---05/22/2014 > > 06:19:16 PM---If an IP is reserved for a tenant, should the tenant > > need to]Carl Baldwin ---05/22/2014 06:19:16 PM---If an IP is > > reserved for a tenant, should the tenant need to explicitly ask for > > that specific IP to > > > > From: Carl Baldwin <c...@ecbaldwin.net> > > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>, > > Date: 05/22/2014 06:19 PM > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] reservation of fixed ip > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > If an IP is reserved for a tenant, should the tenant need to > > explicitly ask for that specific IP to be allocated when creating a > > floating ip or port? And it would pull from the regular pool if a > > specific IP is not requested. Or, does the allocator just pull from > > the tenant's reserved pool whenever it needs an IP on a subnet? If > > the latter, then I think Salvatore's concern still a valid one. > > > > I think if a tenant wants an IP address reserved then he probably > > has a specific purpose for that IP address in mind. That leads me > > to think that he should be required to pass the specific address > > when creating the associated object in order to make use of it. We > > can't do that yet with all types of allocations but there are > > reviews in progress [1][2]. > > > > Carl > > > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/70286/ > > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/83664/ > > > > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Sławek Kapłoński > > <sla...@kaplonski.pl> wrote: > > > Hello > > > > > > > > > Dnia Wed, 21 May 2014 23:51:48 +0100 > > > Salvatore Orlando <sorla...@nicira.com> napisał: > > > > > >> In principle there is nothing that should prevent us from > > >> implementing an IP reservation mechanism. > > >> > > >> As with anything, the first thing to check is literature or > > >> "related work"! If any other IaaS system is implementing such a > > >> mechanism, is it exposed through the API somehow? > > >> Also this feature is likely to be provided by IPAM systems. If > > >> yes, what constructs do they use? > > >> I do not have the answers to this questions, but I'll try to > > >> document myself; if you have them - please post them here. > > >> > > >> This new feature would probably be baked into neutron's IPAM > > >> logic. When allocating an IP, first check from within the IP > > >> reservation pool, and then if it's not found check from standard > > >> allocation pools (this has non negligible impact on availability > > >> ranges management, but these are implementation details). > > >> Aspects to consider, requirement-wise, are: > > >> 1) Should reservations also be classified by "qualification" of > > >> the port? For instance, is it important to specify that an IP > > >> should be used for the gateway port rather than for a floating > > >> IP port? > > > > > > IMHO it is not required when IP is reserved. User should have > > > possibility to reserve such IP for his tenant and later use it as > > > he want (floating ip, instance or whatever) > > > > > >> 2) Are reservations something that an admin could specify on a > > >> tenant-basis (hence an admin API extension), or an implicit > > >> mechanism that can be tuned using configuration variables (for > > >> instance create an IP reservation a for gateway port for a given > > >> tenant when a router gateway is set). > > >> > > >> I apologise if these questions are dumb. I'm just trying to > > >> frame this discussion into something which could then possibly > > >> lead to submitting a specification. > > >> > > >> Salvatore > > >> > > >> > > >> On 21 May 2014 21:37, Collins, Sean > > >> <sean_colli...@cable.comcast.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> > (Edited the subject since a lot of people filter based on the > > >> > subject line) > > >> > > > >> > I would also be interested in reserved IPs - since we do not > > >> > deploy the layer 3 agent and use the provider networking > > >> > extension and a hardware router. > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 03:46:53PM EDT, Sławek Kapłoński wrote: > > >> > > Hello, > > >> > > > > >> > > Ok, I found that now there is probably no such feature to > > >> > > reserve fixed ip for tenant. So I was thinking about add > > >> > > such feature to neutron. I mean that it should have new > > >> > > table with reserved ips in neutron database and neutron will > > >> > > check this table every time when new port will be created > > >> > > (or updated) and IP should be associated with this port. If > > >> > > user has got reserved IP it should be then used for new > > >> > > port, if IP is reserver by other tenant - it shouldn't be > > >> > > used. What You are thinking about such possibility? Is it > > >> > > possible to add it in some future release of neutron? > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Best regards > > >> > > Sławek Kapłoński > > >> > > sla...@kaplonski.pl > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Dnia Mon, 19 May 2014 20:07:43 +0200 > > >> > > Sławek Kapłoński <sla...@kaplonski.pl> napisał: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Hello, > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I'm using openstack with neutron and ML2 plugin. Is there > > >> > > > any way to reserve fixed IP from shared external network > > >> > > > for one tenant? I know that there is possibility to create > > >> > > > port with IP and later connect VM to this port. This > > >> > > > solution is almost ok for me but problem is when user > > >> > > > delete this instance - then port is also deleted and it is > > >> > > > not reserved still for the same user and tenant. So maybe > > >> > > > there is any solution to reserve it "permanent"? I know > > >> > > > also about floating IPs but I don't use L3 agents so this > > >> > > > is probably not for me :) > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > >> > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > >> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Sean M. Collins > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > >> > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > >> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > >> > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards > > > Sławek Kapłoński > > > sla...@kaplonski.pl > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev