Public bug reported: I was trying to follow Aaron's guide here: http://blog.aaronorosen.com /implementing-high-availability-instances-with-neutron-using-vrrp/
VRRP is working fine, but with DVR enabled there is no way to get a floatingIP address working with a vIP. There has been a discussion about this on #openstack-neutron on the 16th of April 2015: [23:49:26] <kevinbenton> dguerri was trying to follow Aaron's guide here: http://blog.aaronorosen.com/implementing-high-availability-instances-with-neutron-using-vrrp/ [23:49:35] <kevinbenton> and it doesn't work with DVR [23:50:49] <armax> kevinbenton: ok, but are we sure that’s because of an unbound port? [23:51:37] <kevinbenton> armax: seems to be [23:51:56] <kevinbenton> armax: no l3 agent will respond to an ARP request for the floating IP when i try it [23:52:57] <armax> kevinbenton: ok, now I am with you [23:53:53] <armax> kevinbenton: in aaron’s case the fip is associated to an unbound port [23:54:05] <armax> kevinbenton: and yet routing works fine [23:55:18] <armax> kevinbenton: I don’t think taht for such scenario DVR makes much sense [23:55:48] <armax> kevinbenton: because if we allowed to have teh FIP namespace to land on the dvr_snat agent [23:56:02] <armax> kevinbenton: you’re basically back to central routing [23:56:07] <kevinbenton> armax: right [23:56:11] <armax> kevinbenton: am I making any sense? [23:56:29] <armax> kevinbenton: I am not saying that lack of VRRP support is nice [23:56:37] <armax> kevinbenton: I am tryign to wrap my head around this [23:56:49] <kevinbenton> armax: i was thinking maybe there was some fallback logic where the SNAT one would host a floating IP if there wasn't another l3 agent that could handle it [23:57:16] <kevinbenton> armax: for example if one of the compute nodes wasn't running the l3 agent [23:57:35] <kevinbenton> armax: it would be the same scenario [23:57:37] <kevinbenton> armax: right? ** Affects: neutron Importance: Low Status: Confirmed ** Tags: l3-dvr-backlog -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Yahoo! Engineering Team, which is subscribed to neutron. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1445255 Title: FloatingIP and allowed_address_pairs won't work with DVR Status in OpenStack Neutron (virtual network service): Confirmed Bug description: I was trying to follow Aaron's guide here: http://blog.aaronorosen.com /implementing-high-availability-instances-with-neutron-using-vrrp/ VRRP is working fine, but with DVR enabled there is no way to get a floatingIP address working with a vIP. There has been a discussion about this on #openstack-neutron on the 16th of April 2015: [23:49:26] <kevinbenton> dguerri was trying to follow Aaron's guide here: http://blog.aaronorosen.com/implementing-high-availability-instances-with-neutron-using-vrrp/ [23:49:35] <kevinbenton> and it doesn't work with DVR [23:50:49] <armax> kevinbenton: ok, but are we sure that’s because of an unbound port? [23:51:37] <kevinbenton> armax: seems to be [23:51:56] <kevinbenton> armax: no l3 agent will respond to an ARP request for the floating IP when i try it [23:52:57] <armax> kevinbenton: ok, now I am with you [23:53:53] <armax> kevinbenton: in aaron’s case the fip is associated to an unbound port [23:54:05] <armax> kevinbenton: and yet routing works fine [23:55:18] <armax> kevinbenton: I don’t think taht for such scenario DVR makes much sense [23:55:48] <armax> kevinbenton: because if we allowed to have teh FIP namespace to land on the dvr_snat agent [23:56:02] <armax> kevinbenton: you’re basically back to central routing [23:56:07] <kevinbenton> armax: right [23:56:11] <armax> kevinbenton: am I making any sense? [23:56:29] <armax> kevinbenton: I am not saying that lack of VRRP support is nice [23:56:37] <armax> kevinbenton: I am tryign to wrap my head around this [23:56:49] <kevinbenton> armax: i was thinking maybe there was some fallback logic where the SNAT one would host a floating IP if there wasn't another l3 agent that could handle it [23:57:16] <kevinbenton> armax: for example if one of the compute nodes wasn't running the l3 agent [23:57:35] <kevinbenton> armax: it would be the same scenario [23:57:37] <kevinbenton> armax: right? To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1445255/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yahoo-eng-team Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yahoo-eng-team More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
