-
Bug
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
Minor
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
False
-
-
False
-
?
-
rhos-conplat-core-operators
-
None
-
-
-
-
Moderate
Right now we utilize macvlan in NetworkAttachmentDefinitions on top of physical interface:
# cat openstack-net-attach-def.yaml apiVersion: k8s.cni.cncf.io/v1 kind: NetworkAttachmentDefinition metadata: name: storage-network namespace: openstack spec: config: | { "cniVersion": "0.3.1", "name": "internalapi", "type": "macvlan", "master": "enp8s0", "ipam": { "type": "whereabouts", "range": "192.168.152.0/24", "range_start": "192.168.152.30", "range_end": "192.168.152.70" } } ---
Customer want to use localnet topology:
- apiVersion: nmstate.io/v1
kind: NodeNetworkConfigurationPolicy
metadata:
name: master-bridge-mappings
spec:
desiredState:
interfaces:
- bridge:
allow-extra-patch-ports: true
port:
- name: bond2
- name: storage
name: br-storage
state: up
type: ovs-bridge
- ipv4:
dhcp: true
enabled: true
ipv6:
enabled: false
mtu: 9000
name: storage
type: ovs-interface
ovn:
bridge-mappings:
- bridge: br-storage
localnet: storage
state: present
nodeSelector:
node-role.kubernetes.io/control-plane: ""
Customer is currently deploying the RHOSO18 and testing this configuration:
apiVersion: k8s.cni.cncf.io/v1
kind: NetworkAttachmentDefinition
metadata:
name: storage-network
namespace: openstack
spec:
config: |
{
"cniVersion": "0.3.1",
"name": "storage",
"type": "ovn-k8s-cni-overlay",
"topology": "localnet",
"physicalNetworkName": "storage",
"netAttachDefName": "openstack/storage-network",
"subnets": "192.168.152.0/24",
"excludeSubnets": "192.168.152.0/21,192.168.152.0/22"
}
Is this configuration supported/tested and are there any known limitations, for example will the octavia be able to communicate with amphora or any other issues?
What would be the requirements to achieve such configuration, any routing, changes to OpenVSwitch are needed?