JuJu, LXC, OpenStack charm problem w/Nova & Quantum

Mon Mar 17 12:09:35 UTC 2014

Sorry I forgot to include the link to ON.Lab

http://onlab.us/

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:49 AM, brian mullan <bmullan.mail at gmail.com>wrote:

> Of course no sooner, had just sent my previous reply when doing further
> web searches I found that PlanetLab's <http://www.planet-lab.org/> ONLab
> OpenCloud project appears to already be working on exactly what I was
> thinking of.
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/jomarcus1/onrc-open-cloud1
>
> PlanetLab's work is sponsored by the National Science Foundation.
>
> It looks like their OpenCloud project uses (or will use) OpenStack for
> "cloud" mgmt, LXC containers for virtualization, OpenVirtualSwitch (OVS)
> usage to experiment with SDN and Network Function Virtualization (NFV).
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:15 AM, brian mullan <bmullan.mail at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> John thanks for your note.   Yes I have used Juju before to deploy and
>> use OpenStack on KVM as well as on vmware..
>>
>> *This was an experiment*.   But in OpenStack the virtualization type of
>> the vm is specified by the hypervisor configured for OpenStack (kvm, xen,
>> vmware etc).
>>
>> The OpenStack site documentation does say LXC is one of the supported
>> options but the site doesn't say much else in regards to what does or does
>> not work.
>>
>> If OpenStack "could" be made to work with LXC then for linux based
>> workloads...  OpenStack would be a great management system for a
>> multi-tenant capable LXC based "cloud" environment.
>>
>> LXC 1.0 introduced a great deal of new capabilities to LXC including
>> support for fully *unprivileged* containers and a host of new
>> backingstore options.
>>
>> Stephane Graber did a great series of blog posts introducing LXC 1.0's
>> new features - found here<https://www.stgraber.org/2013/12/20/lxc-1-0-blog-post-series/>.
>>
>> And yes, nested LXC does work and I've been using it for about a year now
>> myself.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 8:44 AM, John Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I believe that Nova Compute itself prefers to deploy its units as KVM.
>>> (So when a user connects to your Openstack deployment and asks for a
>>> VM, they will get a KVM backed machine).
>>> IIRC, you *cannot*  create a KVM container inside an LXC container. So
>>> you wouldn't be able to deploy Nova-compute into an LXC if it then
>>> wanted to deploy KVM instances. Perhaps you could do something where
>>> you tell Nova-compute to create LXC containers. You would then end up
>>> with nested LXC, which I know had some bugs in the past (If you get
>>> the cgroups wrong, the nested containers will refuse to run do to App
>>> Armor profiles, etc).
>>>
>>> So I'm guessing that the Openstack charms are designed to deploy onto
>>> more real-metal than containers, and barring that,probably KVM
>>> containers rather than LXC.
>>>
>>> John
>>> =:->
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 4:08 PM, brian mullan <bmullan.mail at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > OpenStack itself says it supports LXC:
>>> > http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/config-reference/content/lxc.html
>>> >
>>> > and although a bit dated this OpenStack doc shows (under Ubuntu
>>> Natty)...
>>> > some config setup info:
>>> >
>>> > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LXC
>>> >
>>> > My orig post had said 2 OpenStack "services" were left in Red State
>>> with
>>> > some sort of message about problem with hooks.
>>> >
>>> > The two were:
>>> >
>>> > nova-compute
>>> > quantum-gateway
>>> >
>>> > I can kind of understand the "quantum-gateway"
>>> > due to lxc/host networking being a bit different.
>>> >
>>> > But I just wasn't comfortable that the nova-compute part of the charm
>>> had a
>>> > problem because that is just for "compute" resources.
>>> > The "storage" services of OpenStack in the Charm had already gone into
>>> a
>>> > "green" state.
>>> >
>>> > I would like to suggest that there may be a bug in the JuJu OpenStack
>>> > Charm's hooks related either/both of the above 2 "services"
>>> > when used with LXC (re "local" provider).
>>> >
>>> > Now as I have not tried to deploy that charm to say Amazon... I guess
>>>  I
>>> > could be jumping the gun and perhaps this problem
>>> > exists w/other environments?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Adam Stokes <adam.stokes at ubuntu.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> I also think that nova and lxc do not mingle well either. I've
>>> >> typically deployed nova in a kvm instance instead
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 1:26 PM, John Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > I'm pretty sure Quantum can't be deployed in LXC because it needs
>>> direct
>>> >> > access to block devices. I could be wrong.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > John
>>> >> > =:->
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Mar 15, 2014 2:08 PM, "brian mullan" <bmullan.mail at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I thought I'd try using some of the "cool new stuff".. so with
>>> latest
>>> >> >> lxc
>>> >> >> 1.0 JuJu & JuJu-gui installed I decided to look at JuJu Bundles.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I set my environment to local and started the OpenStack bundle.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Everything eventually turns green except:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Nova-Compute
>>> >> >> Quantum-Gateway
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Which stay in a red state and provide a message that the charm had
>>> >> >> failed
>>> >> >> hooks.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Just out of curiousity has anyone else tried to do this yet ?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I believe the problem is related to how openstack requires
>>> addressing
>>> >> >> setup for nova (& probably quantum) but not sure how to
>>> troubleshoot
>>> >> >> the
>>> >> >> charm further myself.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Thanks
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Brian Mullan
>>> >> >> Raleigh NC
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Juju mailing list
>>> >> >> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> >> >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>> >> >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Juju mailing list
>>> >> > Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> >> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>> >> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> [ Adam Stokes ]
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20140317/20261387/attachment.html>