Hi Dag, Thanks for the reply. I am trying to use Shapeblue CCS (Container as a Service) with ACS, but for that Isolated networks are required which are only available in Advanced Zone. Further, I want to explore Cloudstack further and am also aiming to test and configure other advanced features such as load balancing and auto scaling without netscaler device. For that I badly need Advanced Zone networking (especially isolated networks offerings). I just want to know if Advanced Zone can succesfully function with two networks, one physcial NIC and no VLAN tagging.
Thanks, Parth Patel On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 at 13:48 Dag Sonstebo <dag.sonst...@shapeblue.com> wrote: > Hi Parth, > > Not sure if I follow. Generally, your management network is untagged, > whilst your public and isolated networks tagged. The underlying idea of > advanced zones is you must have network isolation between multiple guest > networks, otherwise you have no privacy/security. You can do this either at > L2 with VLAN tagging, which is the simplest, or with L3 using various SDN > overlay network solutions (more complicated and comes at a cost). > > If you don’t want to tag anything you’re probably better off using basic > networks, where I believe you could use a single flat subnet (happy to be > proven wrong). > > Regards, > Dag Sonstebo > Cloud Architect > ShapeBlue > > > dag.sonst...@shapeblue.com > www.shapeblue.com > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK > @shapeblue > > > > On 29/03/2018, 08:48, "Parth Patel" <parthpatel2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > After banging my head with different network configuration > permutations, I > don't understand what is the issue with Network Guru here and why it > can't > implement the isolated guest network. I just want to know if Advanced > Zone > can be successfully setup or has someone configured an advanced zone > using > untagged VLAN traffic? > > I have the following configuration of components: > - I have 3 (16 GB Ram and 4 Cores) machines each with 1 physical NIC. > - I have two networks: 192.168.20.0/24 (using this for isolated guest > network) and 172.16.20.0/16 (management server and NFS servers > network) > - I am using KVM hypervisor and NFS for storage. > - Currently, the output of brctl show is (when the Cloudstack is not > running, other wise the interface are populated with three vnets for > cloud0 > and 4-5 vnets for cloudbr0): > bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces > cloud0 8000.000000000000 no > cloudbr0 8000.3464a92a083a no eno1 > virbr0 8000.525400daae23 yes virbr0-nic > > My earlier doubt was if I can configure advanced zone with one physical > interface available in each host, but that was resolved when I read > this > post of ShankerBalan: > > https://shankerbalan.net/blog/cloudstack-simple-advanced-network-example/ > > ACS throws InsufficientVirtualNetworkCapacity exception and lines like: > "NetworkGuru can't implement network [275||15]" are printed in > management > server logs when I try to create a simple CentOS 5.5 NoGUI KVM instance > after a complete and fresh install of ACS (even of CentOS). > > My main doubt here is if I can successfully configure an advanced zone > with > two networks but with untagged VLAN traffic ? I can't currently > configure > the router or switches to allow tagged VLAN networking as I am doing > this > project in my university. But, I have requested and gained access to > the > mentioned two networks: 192.168.20.0/24 and 172.16.20.0/16 and both > networks are pingable and have internet access across all three > machines. > Can anyone help me with this please? > > Thanks, > Parth Patel > > >
