Jump to: navigation, search

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

(Meeting Dec 16, 2013)
(Meeting Dec 16, 2013)
Line 23: Line 23:
 
* other ovs_neutron_agent issues:  
 
* other ovs_neutron_agent issues:  
 
** lacking ovs atomicity like iptables-restore has (all connections might be dropped/allowed): one possibility is to have a dynamic multi-table hotswap
 
** lacking ovs atomicity like iptables-restore has (all connections might be dropped/allowed): one possibility is to have a dynamic multi-table hotswap
** neutron-rootwrap-xen-dom0 bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1185872/comments/3, https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1259748
+
** neutron-rootwrap-xen-dom0 bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1185872/comments/3, https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1259748 (addressed by https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62346/)
 
** table, priority, cookie, actions coordination: ok for now to be hard-coded in Neutron, but will need an abstraction layer in the future possibly
 
** table, priority, cookie, actions coordination: ok for now to be hard-coded in Neutron, but will need an abstraction layer in the future possibly

Revision as of 15:44, 16 December 2013

Discussion for <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/ovs-firewall-driver>

Meeting Dec 16, 2013

  • Purpose restatement
  • Design decisions
  • Overview of prototype
    • all security group flows on integration bridge
    • currently all on table 0, thinking about multi-table setup (table0 port security, other: ingress, egress)
    • 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 major WIP:
      • adding IPv6 flows
      • adding multiple ports in range: debating trying out port bitmask or N flows for N ports or any other suggestions?
      • TODO unit/integration tests (integration tests help is always appreciated)
  • other ovs_neutron_agent issues: