Hello Sonali,

In an advanced zone with security groups the guest and public network are 
combined in one. It's very similar to the Basic zone.
So you will end up with a network and all your VMs will be connected to it. You 
will want to use "public" IPs and there will be no NAT involved.

Although you can add more than one network, a VM cannot be connected to more 
than 1 at a time.

You will have a VR which is there to provide DHCP, user data, passwords; it 
will not route traffic.
You will not be able to use the "firewall" feature though obviously you will be 
able to use Security Groups. There is no load balancer or VPN feature 
available, as well.

The main advantage is that the traffic of your VMs bypasses the VR and goes out 
through the host directly, the security groups (iptables rules) are also 
applied on the host; this gives it significantly more performance than an 
Advanced zone.

So look at what your needs are and choose the appropriate type of zone.


HTH
Lucian

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sonali Jadhav" <son...@servercentralen.se>
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, 6 February, 2015 09:26:15
> Subject: RE: Networking in Advance zone with security groups enabled

> So basically in "Advance zone with security groups" on guest network we'll be
> creating both logical networks? i.e. Shared network and Isolated networks?
> 
> So, if we use only Advance zone, then there will be guest and public networks,
> and we can create isolated network on Public traffic interface and shared
> network on Guest traffic interface.
> 
> Where as in case of Advance zone with Security groups, there will be only 
> Guest
> interface, and we can create both types of logical networks on same guest
> traffic interface.
> 
> So I want to understand that, why there is this difference, what advantage we
> get in it?
> 
> (actually I am planning production ready CloudStack deployment architecture, 
> so
> want to understand what's better)

Reply via email to