Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] dns-nameservers order not honored
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 06/23/2015 08:48 PM, Paul Ward wrote: I haven't dug into the code yet, but from testing via CLI and REST API, it appears neutron does not honor the order in which users specify their dns-nameservers. For example, no matter what order I specify 10.0.0.1 and 10.0.0.2 for dns-nameservers, they are always ordered with the numerically lowest IP first when doing a subnet-show (ie, 10.0.0.1 will be first, even if I specified 10.0.0.2 first). As stated above, CLI and REST API behave the same. Strictly speaking, the order of nameservers in API has nothing to do with what is passed to dnsmasq. I believe this is a problem because these are passed to activation on a deployed VM in the order neutron lists them in the subnet. A user may have a reason they want the numerically higher DNS IP listed first, say if they are trying to load balance their DNS servers. By always ordering them numerically, we give them no way to do this. You still can achieve nameserver rotation on your instances with 'rotate' option in your /etc/resolv.conf. So my question is... is this by design or an oversight? If it's an oversight, I'll dig into the code and propose a patch. I think patches are more than welcome. Ihar -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVimzbAAoJEC5aWaUY1u57T3MIANK/EDDgLJOrjOjeVnaDCr9z Rr6jxZtnoEvK+6Ts/L+YWw1YK7QYzj83wlg4QloWeIe8yDTTYCjwqsuNiJ2P8d8k bGbrp9tTVpVE0hrU58PQ6MweoKsAmIQ2aPWDbwuvDOjJUUXg6YNiFYwYYVIabrH2 95NrcbcSFHLUpBGfSiZkEDEdfg9cHY+l1EqlEdou3gnR8baH+/rFbqtaLr3D6z3s bMENULIU5seaT3WDCibo0l4bHmfXl4ropaiCxPmXDDi4dl6/q21NpR1UHx5armyA 7a3QO5g8tFoAzLanrdRAIRJYSYyPTW+T0fHYkGXHE90N1sMMpKQagVCAyw+dZFs= =+Bm9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [neutron] dns-nameservers order not honored
I haven't dug into the code yet, but from testing via CLI and REST API, it appears neutron does not honor the order in which users specify their dns-nameservers. For example, no matter what order I specify 10.0.0.1 and 10.0.0.2 for dns-nameservers, they are always ordered with the numerically lowest IP first when doing a subnet-show (ie, 10.0.0.1 will be first, even if I specified 10.0.0.2 first). As stated above, CLI and REST API behave the same. I believe this is a problem because these are passed to activation on a deployed VM in the order neutron lists them in the subnet. A user may have a reason they want the numerically higher DNS IP listed first, say if they are trying to load balance their DNS servers. By always ordering them numerically, we give them no way to do this. So my question is... is this by design or an oversight? If it's an oversight, I'll dig into the code and propose a patch. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] dns-nameservers order not honored
Hi Paul, There is an old bug on this issue: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1218629 If I remember correctly, the root of the problem was the database definition for the DNS values. On 06/23/2015 01:48 PM, Paul Ward wrote: I haven't dug into the code yet, but from testing via CLI and REST API, it appears neutron does not honor the order in which users specify their dns-nameservers. For example, no matter what order I specify 10.0.0.1 and 10.0.0.2 for dns-nameservers, they are always ordered with the numerically lowest IP first when doing a subnet-show (ie, 10.0.0.1 will be first, even if I specified 10.0.0.2 first). As stated above, CLI and REST API behave the same. I believe this is a problem because these are passed to activation on a deployed VM in the order neutron lists them in the subnet. A user may have a reason they want the numerically higher DNS IP listed first, say if they are trying to load balance their DNS servers. By always ordering them numerically, we give them no way to do this. So my question is... is this by design or an oversight? If it's an oversight, I'll dig into the code and propose a patch. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- John Kasperski __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
