Yes, dnsmasq is there as a simple solution for people that didn't want a
separate DNS server specified in their subnet.
Can you just enable DHCP on the subnet? Even though your containers don't
use it for addressing, it will still work for resolving DNS. (it doesn't
answer anonymous DHCP queries i
On 11/05/2016 18:45, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
>> neutron subnet-show with the UUID of the subnet they have a port on
>> will tell you.
>>
>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:40 AM, Mike Spreitzer
> wrote:
>> "Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/10/2016 09:30
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> neutron subnet-show with the UUID of the subnet they have a port on
> will tell you.
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:40 AM, Mike Spreitzer
wrote:
> "Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/10/2016 09:30:26 AM:
>
> > ...
> > > Ah, that may be what I
Whoops. What I just said was wrong if it hadn't been explicitly overwritten.
I think you will end up having to do a port-list looking for the DHCP
port(s).
http://paste.openstack.org/show/496604/
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> neutron subnet-show with the UUID of the s
neutron subnet-show with the UUID of the subnet they have a port on will
tell you.
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:40 AM, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> "Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/10/2016 09:30:26 AM:
>
> > ...
> > > Ah, that may be what I want. BTW, I am not planning to use Nova. I am
> > > planning to
"Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/10/2016 09:30:26 AM:
> ...
> > Ah, that may be what I want. BTW, I am not planning to use Nova. I
am
> > planning to use Swarm and Kubernetes to create containers attached to
> > Neutron private tenant networks. What DNS server would I configure
> > those container
On 09/05/2016 21:48, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> "Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/09/2016 04:08:07 PM:
>
> > ...
> > On 09/05/2016 20:55, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> > ...
> > > Oh, right, the network gets to specify the rest of the FQDN. In my
> case
> > > I am interested in Neutron Ports on tenant netw
On 9 May 2016 9:48 p.m., Mike Spreitzer wrote:
>
> "Hayes, Graham" wrote on
"Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/09/2016 04:08:07 PM:
> ...
> On 09/05/2016 20:55, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> ...
> > Oh, right, the network gets to specify the rest of the FQDN. In my case
> > I am interested in Neutron Por
"Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/09/2016 04:08:07 PM:
> ...
> On 09/05/2016 20:55, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> ...
> > Oh, right, the network gets to specify the rest of the FQDN. In my
case
> > I am interested in Neutron Ports on tenant networks. So with a
per-port
> > "hostname" (first label) and pe
On 09/05/2016 20:55, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> "Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/09/2016 03:00:34 PM:
>
> > From: "Hayes, Graham"
> > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> >
> > Date: 05/09/2016 03:05 PM
&
"Hayes, Graham" wrote on 05/09/2016 03:00:34 PM:
> From: "Hayes, Graham"
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>
> Date: 05/09/2016 03:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [designate] multi-tenancy in
>
On 09/05/2016 19:21, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> I just read
> http://docs.openstack.org/mitaka/networking-guide/adv-config-dns.htmland,
> unless
> I missed something, it seems to be describing something that is not
> multi-tenant. I am focused on FQDNs for Neutron Ports. For those, only
> the "host
I just read
http://docs.openstack.org/mitaka/networking-guide/adv-config-dns.html and,
unless I missed something, it seems to be describing something that is not
multi-tenant. I am focused on FQDNs for Neutron Ports. For those, only
the "hostname" part (the first label, in official DNS jargon
13 matches
Mail list logo
