Hi Salvatore,
Thank you for your questions and suggestions.
If I got your design right, the network manager in the current nova implementation (Flat & VLAN)
will become plugins. And a plugin can be divided into a "management" component (the one which
runs on the network node) and an "agent" (the component running on the compute node). Is that
correct?
Yes, it's exactly correct.
implies that there should be an association between the network entity and the
plugin type.
In my current opinion, the network plugins should be possible to be
selected per project instead of network. When a project is created, the
user should be allowed to specify which type of plugin to use. After
that, the user should be allowed to get the plugin to create network
with plugin specific parameters. For this reason a column which
describes the plugin type should be added to the project table of the DB
and the type of plugin should be added to the create_project method as
an optional parameter.
I'm not totally sure about the virtual port concept. Do we really need it?
Wouldn't be easier to have a model in which VIF are directly connected to
logical switches and virtual port are implicitly assigned?
I also think that your design is simpler.
However for example considering live migration of VM, the concepts of
"virtual port" can assure the compute manager that the network
environment behind the port will be kept.
Finally, have you already got some design ideas concerning how to provide L4/L7
services (for instance firewall, DHCP, DNS, load balancing, etc.) to nova
networks?
I'm designing only how to migrate current network model(firewall and
DHCP) to the plugin now.
Cheers,
Hisaharu Ishii
(2011/02/11 1:19), Salvatore Orlando wrote:
Hi Hisaharu,
Thanks for sharing this design proposal and the POC code.
I will have a look at the code as soon as possible.
At a first glance, I think the design that you are proposing is in line with
the goals of the network service blueprint
(http://wiki.openstack.org/NetworkService)
If I got your design right, the network manager in the current nova implementation (Flat& VLAN)
will become plugins. And a plugin can be divided into a "management" component (the one which
runs on the network node) and an "agent" (the component running on the compute node). Is that
correct?
Also, from your design it seems it should be possible to have different plugins
running together in the same deployment. This makes a lot of sense to me, and
IMHO, implies that there should be an association between the network entity
and the plugin type. When a network is created, the user should be allowed to
specify which type of plugin should be handling that network. For this reason I
think maybe the create_network API should accept the type of plugin as an
optional parameter, in order to route the request to the appropriate network
node. If no parameter is provided then the request would be routed to a
'default' network node.
I also noticed you are introducing the concepts of "logical switch" and "virtual
port". While I totally agree on the logical switch concept, I'm not totally sure about the
virtual port concept. Do we really need it? Wouldn't be easier to have a model in which VIF are
directly connected to logical switches and virtual port are implicitly assigned?
Finally, have you already got some design ideas concerning how to provide L4/L7
services (for instance firewall, DHCP, DNS, load balancing, etc.) to nova
networks?
Cheers,
Salvatore
-----Original Message-----
From: openstack-bounces+salvatore.orlando=eu.citrix....@lists.launchpad.net
[mailto:openstack-bounces+salvatore.orlando=eu.citrix....@lists.launchpad.net]
On Behalf Of ?? ??
Sent: 10 February 2011 11:48
To: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] Network Service for L2/L3 Network Infrastructure
blueprint
Hi, all
As we have said before, we have started designing and writing POC codes of
network service.
> - I know that there were several documents on the new network
> service issue that were locally exchanged so far.
> Why not collecting them into one place and share them publicly?
Based on these documents, I created an image of implementation (attached). And
I propose the following set of methods as the generic network service APIs.
- create_vnic(): vnic_id
Create a VNIC and return the ID of the created VNIC.
- list_vnics(vm_id): [vnic_id]
Return the list of vnic_id, where vnic_id is the ID of a VNIC.
- destroy_vnic(vnic_id)
Remove a VNIC from its VM, given its ID, and destroy it.
- plug(vnic_id, port_id)
Plug the VNIC with ID vnic_id into the port with ID port_id managed by
this network service.
- unplug(vnic_id)
Unplug the VNIC from its port, previously plugged by calling plug().
- create_network(): network_id
Create a new logical network.
- list_networks(project_id): [network_id]
Return the list of logical networks available for project with ID
project_id.
- destroy_network(network_id)
Destroy the logical network with ID network_id.
- create_port(network_id): port_id
Create a port in the logical network with ID network_id, and return the
port's ID.
- list_ports(network_id): [port_id]
Return the list of IDs of ports in a network given its ID.
- destroy_port(port_id)
Destroy port with ID port_id.
This design is a first draft.
So we would appreciate it if you would give us some comments.
In parallel with it, we are writing POC codes and uploading it to
"lp:~ntt-pf-lab/nova/network-service".
Thanks,
Hisaharu Ishii
(2011/02/02 19:02), Koji IIDA wrote:
Hi, all
We, NTT PF Lab., also agree to discuss about network service at the
Diablo DS.
However, we would really like to include network service in the Diablo
release because our customers strongly demand this feature. And we
think that it is quite important to merge new network service to trunk
soon after Diablo DS so that every developer can contribute their
effort based on the new code.
We are planning to provide source code for network service in a couple
of weeks. We would appreciate it if you would review it and give us
some feedback before the next design summit.
Ewan, thanks for your making new entry at wiki page (*1). We will also
post our comments soon.
(*1) http://wiki.openstack.org/NetworkService
Thanks,
Koji Iida
(2011/01/31 21:19), Ewan Mellor wrote:
I will collect the documents together as you suggest, and I agree that we need
to get the requirements laid out again.
Please subscribe to the blueprint on Launchpad -- that way you will be notified
of updates.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/bexar-network-service
Thanks,
Ewan.
-----Original Message-----
From: openstack-bounces+ewan.mellor=citrix....@lists.launchpad.net
[mailto:openstack-bounces+ewan.mellor=citrix....@lists.launchpad.net
]
On Behalf Of Masanori ITOH
Sent: 31 January 2011 10:31
To: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] Network Service for L2/L3 Network
Infrastructure blueprint
Hello,
We, NTT DATA, also agree with majority of folks.
It's realistic shooting for the the Diablo time frame to have the
new network service.
Here are my suggestions:
- I know that there were several documents on the new network
service issue
that were locally exchanged so far.
Why not collecting them into one place and share them publicly?
- I know that the discussion went into a bit implementation details.
But now, what about starting the discussion from the higher level
design things (again)? Especially, from the requirements level.
Any thoughts?
Masanori
From: John Purrier<j...@openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [Openstack] Network Service for L2/L3 Network
Infrastructure blueprint
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 06:06:26 +0900
You are correct, the networking service will be more complex than
the
volume
service. The existing blueprint is pretty comprehensive, not only
encompassing the functionality that exists in today's network
service
in
Nova, but also forward looking functionality around flexible
networking/openvswitch and layer 2 network bridging between cloud
deployments.
This will be a longer term project and will serve as the bedrock
for
many
future OpenStack capabilities.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: openstack-bounces+john=openstack....@lists.launchpad.net
[mailto:openstack-bounces+john=openstack....@lists.launchpad.net]
On
Behalf
Of Thierry Carrez
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 1:52 PM
To: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] Network Service for L2/L3 Network
Infrastructure
blueprint
John Purrier wrote:
Here is the suggestion. It is clear from the response on the list
that
refactoring Nova in the Cactus timeframe will be too risky,
particularly as
we are focusing Cactus on Stability, Reliability, and Deployability
(along
with a complete OpenStack API). For Cactus we should leave the
network and
volume services alone in Nova to minimize destabilizing the code
base. In
parallel, we can initiate the Network and Volume Service projects
in Launchpad and allow the teams that form around these efforts to
move
in
parallel, perhaps seeding their projects from the existing Nova code.
Once we complete Cactus we can have discussions at the Diablo DS
about
progress these efforts have made and how best to move forward with
Nova
integration and determine release targets.
I agree that there is value in starting the proof-of-concept work
around
the network services, without sacrificing too many developers to
it,
so
that a good plan can be presented and discussed at the Diablo Summit.
If volume sounds relatively simple to me, network sounds
significantly
more complex (just looking at the code ,network manager code is
currently used both by nova-compute and nova-network to modify the
local
networking stack, so it's more than just handing out IP addresses
through an API).
Cheers,
--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Release Manager, OpenStack
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
