-
Epic
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
Undefined
-
None
-
None
-
host-dpdk
-
To Do
-
CNV-12626 - Virtual Network Functions VNF
Goal
Link redundancy and aggregation for high-performance DPDK guests
Background
Provide support for host-based/OVS-based DPDK for virtual machines running on-top of OpenShift Virtualisation, allowing them to utilise the performance/latency benefits of DPDK without having to rely on the current SRIOV-only solution. The main driver behind this is to allow "telco-like" features to be exposed for virtual machines, and whilst the SRIOV-based solution we have for DPDK today (currently tech preview with 4.8) provides a lot of throughput potential, it doesn't address all of the expectations that customers have, especially if they've come from an OpenStack world. One of the key expectation is for failover/link-redundancy - with OpenStack one can expose a VIF to a virtual machine that has OVS-DPDK acceleration available via the host, and runs on-top of an LACP bond at the host level, meaning the VM running on-top never needs to care about link availability, it only sees a single VIF that has both DPDK support and the benefits of both link redundancy and link aggregation supplied by the host... so both failover and aggregated throughput. With the SRIOV-only approach that we have today, they have to manage the link redundancy themselves from within the guest, e.g. a bond of two VF's, and can only do active/backup bonding (no link aggregation, only the performance of a single VF) due to the upstream switch not being able to provide LACP support for the VF's.
User Stories
- As an administrator, I want to offer up DPDK-capable network interfaces for my developers and application owners that provides high throughput and link redundancy out of the box.
- As a developer/application-owner, I want to deploy my applications into an environment that doesn't rely on me having to manage the link availability from within the guest.
- As an infrastructure owner looking to move to OpenShift from OpenStack, I need to make sure that we don't see a regression between what we have today with OVS-DPDK and what is being offered with OpenShift.
Non-Requirements
- tbd
Notes
- tbd
Owners
Role | Contact |
---|---|
PM | TBD |
Documentation Owner | TBD |
Delivery Owner | (See assignee) |
Quality Engineer | (See QE Assignee) |
Done Checklist
Who | What | Reference |
---|---|---|
DEV | Upstream roadmap issue | <link to GitHub Issue> |
DEV | Upstream code and tests merged | <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue> |
DEV | Upstream documentation merged | <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue> |
DEV | gap doc updated | <name sheet and cell> |
DEV | Upgrade consideration | <link to upgrade-related test or design doc> |
DEV | CEE/PX summary presentation | label epic with cee-training and add a <link to your support-facingĀ preso> |
QE | Test plans in Polarion | <link or reference to Polarion> |
QE | Automated tests merged | <link or reference to automated tests> |
DOC | Downstream documentation merged | <link to meaningful PR> |
- depends on
-
CNV-20702 KubeVirt network binding plugin interface
- Closed