cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrija Panic <>
Subject Re: Physical Network Setup and Labels for mixed XenServer / KVM Infrastructure
Date Wed, 14 Aug 2019 15:57:16 GMT
Hi Melanie,

a) I assume you are planning on staying on single "Physical network" in ACS?
b) are you planning on reconfiguring your XenServer hosts at all (in sense
of networking) or just thinking adding KVM hosts and defining proper KMV
Traffic Label for each traffic type you have?

Makes sense to have all 4 traffic types targeting different Traffic Labels
(networks/bridges) - since later you can change your underlying
NICs/cabling infra to stick in more NICs as you suggested.
I assume zero difference on switch port configuration - VLAN is a VLAN,
whatever bridge/openvSwitch you use on hosts locally.

This would an interesting exercise anyway...


On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 16:21, Melanie Desaive <>

> Hello,
> we plan to change from XenServer to KVM virtualisation for Apache
> CloudStack 4.11 with advanced networking.
> I am currently installing an KVM proof of concept und would like to
> integrate two KVM hosts for testing as a new cluster to CloudStack.
> I got some questions concerning the networking setup for the zone.
> I plan to use OpenVSwitch on the KVM virtualization hosts.
> I understand, that I can now, once define the labels for the physical
> network of the zone for KVM. I do now have the opportunity to decide
> newly about the division between the different network types (e.g.
> public, guest, management, storage). I do not have to keep the
> decisions made for XenServer. Is this correct?
> For XenServer we did use one LACP trunk, that carries all traffic. On
> this LACP trunk we have one bridge/network, named "LACPTRUNK" which is
> used for all four different traffic categories.
> ----
> uuid ( RO)                : ca88f7f8-2ce0-b3ea-b218-26336ee6496e
>           name-label ( RW): LACPTRUNK
>     name-description ( RW): 2 x 10GBit/s LACP Dynamic über eth2 und
> eth3 via openvswitch
>               bridge ( RO): xapi1
> ----
> I think that it could be a good idea, to handle this differently in
> KVM and would like to ask your opinion.
> I think about preparing four bridges on the KVM hosts. One bridge for
> each out of (public, guest, management, storage). Problem is, that in
> our actual hardware configuration I do only have one physical (lacp bond)
> port on the virtualization hosts. I would like to try to use the syntax
> suggested in
> preparing several "fake bridges" on the main LACP bond interface. Never
> nested ovs bridges up to now, do I have to expect something unexpected?
> By splitting up the bridges, I could open the opportunity to later set
> up virtualization hosts with more physical network interface and
> dedicate interfaces to traffic types. Using a different OVS
> configuration for future KVM clusters. Is that correct?
> What do I have to keep in mind regarding the surrounding network
> infrastrukture and VLAN configuration for the switch ports the hosts
> are attached to, when assigning more labels for KVM hosts, than I used
> with XenServer?
> Do I have to expect different requirements for the switches? I would
> expect the same switch port setup beeing valid for KVM and XenServer.
> Thank you all and best greetings,
> Melanie
> ---
> --
> --
> Heinlein Support GmbH
> Schwedter Str. 8/9b, 10119 Berlin
> Tel: 030 / 40 50 51 - 62
> Fax: 030 / 40 50 51 - 19
> Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg - HRB 93818 B
> Geschäftsführer: Peer Heinlein - Sitz: Berlin


Andrija Panić

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