If I'm not mistaken, we briefly discussed this at ovscon. It seems to me that this is a fairly complicated issue and proposal, and it might benefit from in-person discussion. I seem to recall that you are local to the Bay Area, and, if so, do you think we could take some time, perhaps next week, to have a meeting over it? Otherwise, I will continue to study it.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 05:40:45PM +0000, venugopal iyer wrote: > Sorry for the resend, I am not sure how the pictures will render in the text > doc, so am attaching the PDF too. > thanks, > -venu > > On Thursday, November 29, 2018, 9:26:54 AM PST, venugopal iyer > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks, Ben. > > Sorry for the delay. Please find attached a draft design proposal and let me > know your comments etc. I did some quick > prototyping to check for feasibility too; I can share that, if it helps. > Note, the document is a draft and, I admit, there might be things that I > haven't thought about/through, or missed. I am > attaching a text doc, assuming it might be easier, but if you'd like it in a > different format, please let me know. > > thanks! > -venu > > On Wednesday, October 31, 2018, 10:30:23 AM PDT, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Honestly the best thing to do is probably to propose a design or, if > it's simple enough, to send a patch. That will probably be more > effective at sparking a discussion. > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 03:33:48PM +0000, venugopal iyer wrote: > > Hi: > > Just wanted to check if folks had any thoughts on the use case Girish > > outlined below. We do have > > a real use case for this and are interested in looking at options for > > supporting more than one VTEP IP.It is currently a limitation for us, > > wanted to know if there are similar use cases folks are looking > > at/interested in addressing. > > > > thanks, > > -venu > > > > On Thursday, September 6, 2018, 9:19:01 AM PDT, venugopal iyer via dev > ><[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Would it be possible for the association <logical port|dst MAC, VTEP> to > >be made > > when the logical port is instantiated on a node? and relayed on to the SB by > > the controller, e.g. assuming a mechanism to specify/determine a physical > > port mapping for a > > logical port for a VM. The <physical port,encap-ip> mappings can be > > specified as > > configuration on the chassis. In the absence of physical port information > > for > > a logical port/VM, I suppose we could default to an encap-ip. > > > > > > just a thought, > > -venu > > On Wednesday, September 5, 2018, 2:03:35 PM PDT, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > How would OVN know which IP to use for a given logical port on a > > chassis? > > > > I think that the "multiple tunnel encapsulations" is meant to cover, > > say, Geneve vs. STT vs. VXLAN, not the case you have in mind. > > > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 09:50:32AM -0700, Girish Moodalbail wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > > > I would like to add more context here. In the diagram below > > > > > > +----------------------------------+ > > > |ovn-host | > > > | | > > > | | > > > | +-------------------------+| > > > | | br-int || > > > | +----+-------------+------+| > > > | | | | > > > | +--v-----+ +---v----+ | > > > | | geneve | | geneve | | > > > | +--+-----+ +---+----+ | > > > | | | | > > > | +-v----+ +--v---+ | > > > | | IP0 | | IP1 | | > > > | +------+ +------+ | > > > +----------+ eth0 +-----+ eth1 +---+ > > > +------+ +------+ > > > > > > eth0 and eth are, say, in its own physical segments. The VMs that are > > > instantiated in the above ovn-host will have multiple interfaces and each > > > of those interface need to be on a different Geneve VTEP. > > > > > > I think the following entry in OVN TODOs ( > > > https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/master/ovn/TODO.rst) > > > > > > ---------------8<------------------8<--------------- > > > Support multiple tunnel encapsulations in Chassis. > > > > > > So far, both ovn-controller and ovn-controller-vtep only allow chassis to > > > have one tunnel encapsulation entry. We should extend the implementation > > > to > > > support multiple tunnel encapsulations > > > ---------------8<------------------8<--------------- > > > > > > captures the above requirement. Is that the case? > > > > > > Thanks again. > > > > > > Regards, > > > ~Girish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 3:00 PM Girish Moodalbail <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > > > Is it possible to configure remote_ip as a 'flow' instead of an IP > > > > address > > > > (i.e., setting ovn-encap-ip to a single IP address)? > > > > > > > > Today, we have one VTEP endpoint per OVN host and all the VMs that > > > > connects to br-int on that OVN host are reachable behind this VTEP > > > > endpoint. Is it possible to have multiple VTEP endpoints for a br-int > > > > bridge and use Open Flow flows to select one of the VTEP endpoint? > > > > > > > > > > > > +----------------------------------+ > > > > |ovn-host | > > > > | | > > > > | | > > > > | +-------------------------+| > > > > | | br-int || > > > > | +----+-------------+------+| > > > > | | | | > > > > | +--v-----+ +---v----+ | > > > > | | geneve | | geneve | | > > > > | +--+-----+ +---+----+ | > > > > | | | | > > > > | +-v----+ +--v---+ | > > > > | | IP0 | | IP1 | | > > > > | +------+ +------+ | > > > > +----------+ eth0 +-----+ eth1 +---+ > > > > +------+ +------+ > > > > > > > > Also, we don't want to bond eth0 and eth1 into a bond interface and then > > > > use bond's IP as VTEP endpoint. > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > ~Girish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > discuss mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev > >too, I can share that if it helps. > > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
