Ahh that makes sense. Answers my question nicely. Thanks guys
On 3 April 2013 22:48, Kelven Yang <kelven.y...@citrix.com> wrote: > > On 4/3/13 5:43 AM, "prasanna" <t...@apache.org> wrote: > > >On 3 April 2013 14:12, David Comerford <davest...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi list, > >> > >> Can anyone tell me what "router.extra.public.nics" is used for? > >> > >> I recently noticed my routers had the default extra 2 NICs and I can't > >>see > >> any need for them. > >> I've also noticed in VMware one of the extra public NICs gets the > >>correct > >> VLAN tag for public traffic but is added to the management vSwitch, > >>which > >> isn't tagged and won't work even if the NIC was used by the router. > >> > > > >I can't say for sure but there's not much in the code (as comments or > >otherwise) to explain the need for the extra nics. If you're not using > >vmware as hypervisor this setting doesn't do anything at all. From > >what I can tell - during router startup additional interfaces are > >added to the vmware routers but the interface remains down. > > > This configuration is no longer needed with introduction of NIC hot-plug > support available in system VM template that is bound with VMware tools > from VMware. > > In old system template that is shipped with Open VMware tools, NIC > hot-plug is not supported, in order to support more public IP addresses on > VR, we have to put a hacking solution, which is to pre-allocate NICs at > VR's creation time, and then using script inside VR to bring it up on > demand. > > router.extra.public.nics is there for such purpose, it tells CloudStack > how many extra static NIC we need to allocate, and these extra NICs will > be attached to a dummy port-group (which may appear confusing to some > people about this behave) > > -Kelven > > > > >
