[ovirt-users] oVirt 3.5 & NAT

Dan Kenigsberg danken at redhat.com
Thu Nov 20 08:14:54 EST 2014


On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 07:08:13AM -0500, Antoni Segura Puimedon wrote:
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken at redhat.com>
> > To: "Phil Daws" <phil.daws at innovot.com>
> > Cc: "users" <users at ovirt.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 1:02:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] oVirt 3.5 & NAT
> > 
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 01:21:27AM +0000, Phil Daws wrote:
> > > Yes, thank you Robert.  The hook is working wonderfully!  Have a single NIC
> > > on the VDSM host configured with public IP, then OVS installed, and VLANs
> > > hanging off that to a guest which is acting as the firewall to
> > > internal/NAT systems.
> > > 
> > > [root at vmh01 ~]# ovs-vsctl show
> > > 077da472-acf6-4141-bd9d-8e42047d3efc
> > >     Bridge "ovsbr0"
> > >         Port "vnet4"
> > >             tag: 14
> > >             Interface "vnet4"
> > >         Port "vnet2"
> > >             tag: 10
> > >             Interface "vnet2"
> > >         Port "ovsbr0"
> > >             Interface "ovsbr0"
> > >                 type: internal
> > >         Port "vnet3"
> > >             tag: 14
> > >             Interface "vnet3"
> > >         Port "vnet1"
> > >             tag: 8
> > >             Interface "vnet1"
> > >     ovs_version: "2.3.90"
> > 
> > Thank you both for your contributions!
> > 
> > From a software design PoV, we'd better not duplicate the extnet code.
> > If a bug is found and fixed in extnet,
> > http://www.ovirt.org/VDSM-Hooks/network-nat would have to be updated as
> > well.
> > 
> > It would be more elegant to ship an additional script with an independent
> > custom property, say "ovs_portgroup". This script would run after extnet
> > does, and would add the portgroup attribute to to the proper element.
> 
> I agree with a separate custom property, but I think that we could make
> extnet look for it too and set the port group itself. It would be backwards
> compatible and simpler.

Yeah, I suppose simplicity wins over puritanism here.


More information about the Users mailing list