11:56 a.m.
Dear Yedidyah,
We are actually seeing collisions, which is why I reached out in first place.
Strange is that is did not happen since few weeks ago, and since then I saw it multiple
times.
For now I am simply going to create new mac pool for each of the clusters and switch to
it, hoping it's not going to affect existing VMs.
Regarding planning, if I would have known, that same mac pool is created across
datacenters/clusters, I would have taken it into account.
Relying on common sense, I just did not expect this to be the case, but to my fault I
should have applied trust-but-verify approach.
-----
kind regards/met vriendelijke groeten
Marko Vrgotic
Sr. System Engineer
ActiveVideo
e: m.vrgotic(a)activevideo.com
On 26/01/2020, 07:45, "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:30 PM Vrgotic, Marko
<M.Vrgotic(a)activevideo.com> wrote:
Hi Yedidyah,
Thank you for you update.
This platform started with 4.3 deployment.
The Default mac address pool, apparently on all Clusters (5) is:
from_mac | to_mac
-------------------+-------------------
56:6f:ef:88:00:00 | 56:6f:ef:88:ff:ff
I think I misled you, or for some reason didn't understand your
original post. The default pool is for "everything". I thought you
refer to different setups - separate engines - and the bug I mentioned
about changing the default was addressed at this scenario.
Inside a single engine, there is only one default.
You should not see collisions *inside* it. Do you? The engine should
know no to allocated the same mac to two different NICs.
Interestingly enough, I am alos not able to add another mac pool to
Default. I can only create new one,
Correct.
let's say MacPool2 and also create only single pool inside.
Option to add second mac range under same name is grayed out, whether I login as SuperUser
or Admin to Aministration Portal.
Indeed. You can only change it, not add a new one with the same name.
Never mind, it is as so, but I am still not "happiest" with:
> Question2: Would there be an harming effect on existing VMs if the default mac
pool would be changed?
=> I am pretty certain it's harmless, but didn't try that myself.
Reason is that I have 600VMs on 5 cluster setup in production - If I make the change
where currently required and we are wrong, its going to affect almost half of those
existing VMs. I did test the change on the staging, and it did not seem to have any
harmful effect but that one has like 5VMs atm.
I will run some additional tests on staging to see if I can get more comfortable before
making change in production, but if anyone else can contribute boosting the confidence,
please let me know.
Ccing Dominik from the network team.
I am pretty certain that people do change/add pools live, but guess
not often - I guess most people plan ahead and then don't touch.
Groetjes,
--
Didi