cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrija Panic <andrija.pa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Best practive for public cloud isolation method ?
Date Thu, 30 Oct 2014 10:49:42 GMT
Hi Vadim,

how do you do SNAT - on hardware firewall I guess ? Manually for each VM
that want's to be on public IP?

On 30 October 2014 11:36, Vadim Kimlaychuk <Vadim.Kimlaychuk@elion.ee>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>         I would also like to hear more about best practices for network
> architecture, but so far have found only VLAN isolation described more or
> less thoroughly.
>         1. We have recently set up VLANs and didn't fill the limit yet.
> :)  GRE is one of the options, but can't say how it works. Haven't even
> tried yet. Would be interesting indeed.
>         2. We use VPC-s only. To enable guest VM  to be on public IP we
> just do SNAT for those who need it. If guest is under "soft LB network
> offer" then you  may need port forwarding, but not sure for 100%. It is
> better probably to add another network offer go guest VM to enable SNAT.
>
> Vadim.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.panic@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 10:40 AM
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Best practive for public cloud isolation method ?
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I'm asking somewhat dump question and generic one, since I'm designing new
> public cloud infrastructure:
>
> We are about to go with KVM, Advanced  zone vlan/vxlan/other isolation
> method, ACS 4.4.1 or possibly revert back to 4.3. We plan on using VPC
> extensively and still provide let's call it "VPS" style VMs if possible.
>
> So:
>
> 1.  Per your experience, what is the best isolation method to be used for
> Guest traffic - I'm talking here about usability of the solution,
> productional one:
> -- vlans - works fine, limited to theoretical maximum of 4095
> -- vxlan - don't really work fine for public cloud, since default MTU of
> 1500 bytes is lowered on vxlan bridge/interface to be 1450 bytes so the
> MTU inside VM must be also lowered...1450 bytes MTU is default/hardcoded
> into iproute/cloudstack, with no option to choose larger MTU on vxlan
> interface/bridge (and ask ADMIN to adjust MTU to a larger one on physical
> network) - also this does not allow us to use jumbo frames, but would be a
> really good thing to do.
> -- GRE - I'm just evaluating/researching this
>
>
> 2. Another quetion - since we want to go heavily with VPC, but still want
> to be able to provide let's call it "VPS" style VMs - what is the best
> aproach to do so?
> We already have Shared/Guest network with access to Internet - so this is
> the way we acomplished single VM to be on a public IP network.
> Or is it better to really dump the VPS style, and just go with normal VPC
> with port forwarding to internal VM - I'm just not so clear if/how much
> CloudStack was designed to support this kind of "VPS" style VMs - my
> understanding is that the focus is really cloud-like/VPC functionality, and
> not VPS style, at least not on Advanced zone together with VPCs - so any
> advice is really welcomed.
>
>
> My experience with vlans is that it works like charm, but has it's
> limitations. Vxlans experience is fine if you can control MTU inside VMs -
> not good for public cloud...
>
>
> Again, generic questions, but I'm looking into some hints if possible and
> your experience that you are wiling to share
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>



-- 

Andrija Panić
--------------------------------------
  http://admintweets.com
--------------------------------------

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message