On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 10:39 AM, Anil Venkata <anilvenk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Guru Shetty <g...@ovn.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On 27 February 2018 at 03:13, Anil Venkata <anilvenk...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> For example, I have a 10.1.0.0/24 network and a load balancer is added >>> to it with 10.1.0.10 as VIP and 10.1.0.2(MAC 50:54:00:00:00:01), >>> 10.1.0.3(MAC 50:54:00:00:00:02) as members. >>> ovn-nbctl create load_balancer vips:10.1.0.10="10.1.0.2,10.1.0.3" >>> >> >> We currently need the VIP to be in a different subnet. You should connect >> switch it to a dummy logical router (or connect it to a external router). >> Since a VIP is in a different subnet, it sends an ARP for logical router IP >> and then things will work. >> >> > > Thanks Guru. Any reason for introducing this constraint(i.e VIP to be in a > different subnet)? Can we address this limitation? > > For OpenStack I think this is a valid use case and I think we should support it. Thanks Numan >>> When I try to send a request from client within the subnet(i.e >>> 10.1.0.33) its not reaching any load balancer members. >>> I noticed ARP not resolved for VIP 10.1.0.10. >>> >>> I tried to resolve this in two ways >>> 1) Adding a new ARP reply ovs flow for VIP 10.1.0.10 with router port's >>> MAC. When client tries to connect VIP, it will use router's MAC. Now router >>> gets the packet after load balancing, and will forward the packet to >>> appropriate member. >>> >>> 2) Second approach, >>> a) Using a new MAC(example, 50:54:00:00:00:ab) for VIP 10.1.0.10, and >>> adding a new ARP reply flow with this MAC. >>> b) As we are not using router, when load balancing changes >>> destination ip, VIP MAC has to be replaced with corresponding member's MAC >>> i.e >>> sudo ovs-ofctl add-flow br-int "table=24,ip,priority=150,dl_d >>> st=50:54:00:00:00:ab,nw_dst=10.1.0.2,action=mod_dl_dst:50:54 >>> :00:00:00:01,load:0x1->NXM_NX_REG15[],resubmit(,32)" >>> sudo ovs-ofctl add-flow br-int "table=24,ip,priority=150,dl_d >>> st=50:54:00:00:00:ab,nw_dst=10.1.0.3,action=mod_dl_dst:50:54 >>> :00:00:00:02,load:0x2->NXM_NX_REG15[],resubmit(,32)" >>> >>> Which approach will be better or is there any alternate solution? >>> >>> Thanks >>> Anil >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> discuss mailing list >>> disc...@openvswitch.org >>> https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list > disc...@openvswitch.org > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
