[Starlingx-discuss] Questions about StarlingX OVS-DPDK firewall driver enhancement
Matt.Peters at windriver.com
Thu Oct 18 14:08:22 UTC 2018
The code change required to use the ‘openvswitch’ driver would be in stx-config. Currently the default driver is ‘noop’, so once the performance testing is complete and verified, this can be updated to be the default.
From: Qin, Kailun [mailto:kailun.qin at intel.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 5:29 AM
To: Peters, Matt; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
Subject: RE: Questions about StarlingX OVS-DPDK firewall driver enhancement
To follow up with the performance concern of (kernel-space) conntrack used in option #3. I’ve checked and evaluated the user-space conntrack functionality in OVS and in Neutron native OVS firewall.
Please kindly see the attached report for details. We can have another sync in the stx-networking weekly meeting later.
From: Peters, Matt [mailto:Matt.Peters at windriver.com]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 6:41 PM
To: Qin, Kailun <kailun.qin at intel.com>; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
Subject: Re: Questions about StarlingX OVS-DPDK firewall driver enhancement
I’m fine with exploring option #3 as an alternative to #2. I wasn’t aware that the native driver fully supported the netdev datapath, but if it can be supported, then I agree it would be a better choice.
From: "Qin, Kailun" <kailun.qin at intel.com<mailto:kailun.qin at intel.com>>
Date: Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 10:09 AM
To: "Peters, Matt" <Matt.Peters at windriver.com<mailto:Matt.Peters at windriver.com>>, "starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io<mailto:starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>" <starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io<mailto:starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>>
Subject: Questions about StarlingX OVS-DPDK firewall driver enhancement
We are doing some ground work for https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2002944 regarding the StarlingX OVS-DPDK firewall driver enhancement. To better understand the requirement, we may need your help on the following question.
There are 3 security group implementations in neutron OVS-DPDK agent.
1. Iptables based security group
The OVS agent and Compute service use a Linux bridge between each instance (VM) and the OVS integration bridge br-int to implement security groups. This implementation is stateful but
cause scalability and performance problems.
2. Openflow based security group
This implementation is stateless and based in OpenFlow 'learn action', which uses a firewall driver in networking-ovs-dpdk project.
3. Openflow + conntrack based security group
This implementation is stateful, which uses a native firewall driver.
The requirement from the enhancement description is that we're going to adopt implementation option 2 for StarlingX OVS-DPDK security group.
Compared with option 3 which is stateful and uses a native firewall driver, what is our consideration on taking option 2 as our target?
Please kindly see the attached doc for further details. Just let me know if anything unclear. Thanks a lot!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Starlingx-discuss