Difference between revisions of "Meetings/Neutron blueprint ovs-firewall-driver"

Revision as of 04:42, 14 December 2013

Purpose restatement
Design decisions
- openvswitch statelessness and security groups frontend API and DB: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ovs-firewall-driver-stateless-2
Overview of prototype
- all security group flows on integration bridge
- currently all on table 0, thinking about multi-table setup
- prototype tested on flat network setup; should work on other network types as-is since the tunnel OVS flows just pass the data to the integration bridge
- still a WIP: barely functional :)
  - working on adding IPv6 flows
  - working on adding multiple ports in range (try port bitmask or N flows per N ports?)
Miscellaneous items:
- ovs_neutron_agent nuances:
  - (1) firewall invoked before agent does anything in C[R]UD operations
  - (2) agent removes all flows at initialization (as well as deletes all flows on port_bound)
  - (3) ovs atomicity like iptables-restore has (all connections might be dropped/allowed): one possibility is to have a dynamic multi-table hotswap
- if extra time, quickly mention:
  - neutron-rootwrap-xen-dom0 bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1185872/comments/3, https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1259748
  - of course, need to add unit/integration tests; if someone wants to help on integration tests, that would be good if that's possible
  - table, priority coordination: ok for now to be hard-coded in Neutron, but will need an abstraction in the future possibly

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 ** currently all on table 0, thinking about multi-table setup
 ** prototype tested on flat network setup; should work on other network types as-is since the tunnel OVS flows just pass the data to the integration bridge
-** still a WIP:
+** still a WIP: barely functional :)
 *** working on adding IPv6 flows
 *** working on adding multiple ports in range (try port bitmask or N flows per N ports?)