Hi Ivan,

I tried your proposal with manually steps in Mitaka, I use netns(instead of 
docker container) and macvlan(instead of ipvlan) in my test:

Did I understand correct? Any comments will be very appricated.

Liping Mao

From:  Liping Mao <li...@cisco.com<mailto:li...@cisco.com>>
Reply-To:  OpenStack List 
Date:  2016年9月13日 星期二 下午7:56
To:  OpenStack List 
Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [Kuryr] IPVLAN data path proposal

Hi Ivan,

It sounds cool!

for security group and allowed address pair,
Maybe we can disable port-security,because all the docker in one vm will share 
one security group on the vm port. I'm not sure how to use sg for each 
docker,maybe just disable port-security can be one of the choice. then do not
need allowed address pairs in this case.

Lipimg Mao

在 2016年9月12日,19:31,Coughlan, Ivan 
<ivan.cough...@intel.com<mailto:ivan.cough...@intel.com>> 写道:

Kuryr proposes to address the issues of double encapsulation and exposure of 
containers as neutron entities when containers are running within VMs.
As an alternative to the vlan-aware-vms and use of ovs within the VM, we 
propose to:
Use allowed-address-pairs configuration for the VM neutron port
Use IPVLAN for wiring the Containers within VM
In this way:
Achieve efficient data path to container within VM
Better leverage OpenStack EPA(Enhanced Platform Awareness) features to 
accelerate the data path (more details below)
Mitigate the risk of vlan-aware-vms not making neutron in time
Provide a solution that works on existing and previous openstack releases
This work should be done in a way permitting the user to optionally select this 
Required ChangesThe four main changes we have identified in the current kuryr 
codebase are as follows:
Introduce an option of enabling “IPVLAN in VM” use case. This can be achieved 
by using a config file option or possibly passing a command line argument. The 
IPVLAN master interface must also be identified.
If using “IPVLAN in VM” use case, Kuryr should no longer create a new port in 
Neutron or the associated VEth pairs. Instead, Kuryr will create a new IPVLAN 
slave interface on top of the VM’s master interface and pass this
slave interface to the Container netns.
If using “IPVLAN in VM” use case, the VM’s port ID needs to be identified so we 
can associate the additional IPVLAN addresses with the port. This can be 
achieved by querying Neutron’s show-port function and passing the VMs
IP address.
If using “IPVLAN in VM” use case, Kuryr should associate the additional IPVLAN 
addresses with the VMs port. This can be achieved using Neutron’s
allowed-address-pairs flag in the
port-update function. We intend to make use of Kuryr’s existing IPAM 
functionality to request these IPs from Neutron.
We wish to discuss the pros and cons.
For example, containers exposure as proper neutron entities and the utility of 
neutron’s allowed-address-pairs is not yet well understood.
We also wish to understand if this approach is acceptable for kuryr?
The Enhanced Platform Awareness initiative is a continuous program to enable 
fine-tuning of the platform for virtualized network functions.
This is done by exposing the processor and platform capabilities through the 
management and orchestration layers.
When a virtual network function is instantiated by an Enhanced Platform 
Awareness enabled orchestrator, the application requirements can be more 
efficiently matched with the platform capabilities.

Intel Research and Development Ireland Limited
Registered in Ireland
Registered Office: Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare
Registered Number: 308263
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole 
use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is 
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the 
sender and delete all

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to