Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add IP Pools and contained IP ranges #1253
Add IP Pools and contained IP ranges #1253
Changes from all commits
b2db78f
cc89d65
a20d28f
2f5733d
e9850d7
23c402f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When it comes time to associate external IPs with instances (or services, like Nexus), do we expect to just use this table as-is, or create a new representation of "assigned" IP addresses?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not entirely sure what that'll look like, but I've had some thoughts. TL;DR: I'm expecting to add the used IPs into things like the
network_interface
table.So the IP Pools that we've implemented here are a bit of a conflation of two things: IP Pools as defined by RFD 21 and "address sets" defined by RFD 267. The former are addresses used for instance NAT. The latter are more general -- they are a superset of IP Pools, but also used for things like services (e.g, Nexus, DNS) and customer network integration (such as prefixes advertised in some routing protocol like BGP). The work here unfortunately merges these, because we need to get something and it's not entirely clear what's required for address sets yet.
That said, I'd expect that the address set table(s) will track what each set is for, and which will direct us to another table, say the
ip_pool
table, for finding the ranges within that set. Specifically for IP Pools in the sense of instance NAT, I do expect that we'll update thenetwork_interface
table (or add a new table) to include the IPs from this range that are currently in use. It all gets pretty hairy here in terms of the database operations, since now there are at least 3 tables to consider for certain operations, such as deleting an IP Pool resource.