Setting up container based Openstack with OVN networking

OVN is a relatively new networking technology which provides a powerful and flexible software implementation of standard networking functionalities such as switches, routers, firewalls, etc. Importantly, OVN is distributed in the sense that the aforementioned network entities can be realized over a distributed set of compute/networking resources. OVN is tightly coupled with OVS, essentially being a layer of abstraction which sits above a set of OVS switches and realizes the above networking components across these switches in a distributed manner.

A number of cloud computing platforms and more general compute resource management frameworks are working on OVN support, including oVirt, Openstack, Kubernetes and Openshift – progress on this front is quite advanced. Interestingly and importantly, one dimension of the OVN vision is that it can act as a common networking substrate which could facilitate integration of more than one of the above systems, although the realization of that vision remains future work.

In the context of our work on developing an edge computing testbed, we set up a modest Openstack cluster, to emulate functionality deployed within an Enterprise Data Centre with OVN providing network capabilities to the cluster. This blog post provides a brief overview of the system architecture and notes some issues we had getting it up and running.

As our system is not a production system, providing High Availability (HA) support was not one of the requirements; consequently, it was not necessary to consider HA OVN mode. As such, it was natural to host the OVN control services, including the Northbound and Southbound DBs and the Northbound daemon (ovn-northd) on the Openstack controller node. As this is the node through which external traffic goes, we also needed to run an external facing OVS on this node which required its own OVN controller and local OVS database. Further, as this OVS chassis is intended for external traffic, it needed to be configured with ‘enable-chassis-as-gw‘.

We configured our system to use DHCP provided by OVN; consequently the neutron DHCP agent was no longer necessary, we removed this process from our controller node. Similarly, L3 routing was done within OVN meaning that the neutron L3 agent was no longer necessary. Openstack metadata support is implemented differently when OVN is used: instead of having a single metadata process running on a controller serving all metadata requests, the metadata service is deployed on each node and the OVS switch on each node routes requests to 169.254.169.254 to the local metadata agent; this then queries the nova metadata service to obtain the metadata for the specific VM.

The services deployed on the controller and compute nodes are shown in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Neutron containers with and without OVN

We used Kolla to deploy the system. Kolla does not currently have full support for OVN; however specific Kolla containers for OVN have been created (e.g. kolla/ubuntu-binary-ovn-controller:queens, kolla/ubuntu-binary-neutron-server-ovn:queens). Hence, we used an approach which augments the standard Kolla-ansible deployment with manual configuration of the extra containers necessary to get the system running on OVN.

As always, many smaller issues were encountered while getting the system working – we will not detail all these issues here, but rather focus on the more substantive issues. We divide these into three specific categories: OVN parameters which need to be configured, configuration specifics for the Kolla OVN containers and finally a point which arose due to assumptions made within Kolla that do not necessarily hold for OVN.

To enable OVN, it was necessary to modify the configuration of the OVS switches operating on all the nodes; the existing OVS containers and OVSDB could be used for this – the OVS version shipped with Kolla/Queens is v2.9.0 – but it was necessary to modify some settings. First, it was necessary to configure system-ids for all of the OVS chassis’ – we chose to select fixed UUIDs a priori and use these for each deployment such that we had a more systematic process for setting up the system but it’s possible to use a randomly generated UUID.

docker exec -ti openvswitch_vswitchd ovs-vsctl set open_vswitch . external-ids:system-id="$SYSTEM_ID"

On the controller node, it was also necessary to set the following parameters:

docker exec -ti openvswitch_vswitchd ovs-vsctl set Open_vSwitch . \
    external_ids:ovn-remote="tcp:$HOST_IP:6642" \
    external_ids:ovn-nb="tcp:$HOST_IP:6641" \
    external_ids:ovn-encap-ip=$HOST_IP external_ids:ovn-encap type="geneve" \
    external-ids:ovn-cms-options="enable-chassis-as-gw"

docker exec openvswitch_vswitchd ovs-vsctl set open . external-ids:ovn-bridge-mappings=physnet1:br-ex

On the compute nodes this was necessary:

docker exec -ti openvswitch_vswitchd ovs-vsctl set Open_vSwitch . \
    external_ids:ovn-remote="tcp:$OVN_SB_HOST_IP:6642" \
    external_ids:ovn-nb="tcp:$OVN_NB_HOST_IP:6641" \
    external_ids:ovn-encap-ip=$HOST_IP \
    external_ids:ovn-encap-type="geneve"

Having changed the OVS configuration on all the nodes, it was then necessary to get the services operational on the nodes. There are two specific aspects to this: modifying the service configuration files as necessary and starting the new services in the correct way.

Not many changes to the service configurations were required. The primary changes related to ensuring the the OVN mechanism driver was used and letting neutron know how to communicate with OVN. We also used the geneve tunnelling protocol in our deployment and this required the following configuration settings:

  • For the neutron server OVN container
    • ml2_conf.ini
              mechanism_drivers = ovn
       	type_drivers = local,flat,vlan,geneve
       	tenant_network_types = geneve
      
       	[ml2_type_geneve]
       	vni_ranges = 1:65536
       	max_header_size = 38
      
       	[ovn]
       	ovn_nb_connection = tcp:172.30.0.101:6641
       	ovn_sb_connection = tcp:172.30.0.101:6642
       	ovn_l3_scheduler = leastloaded
       	ovn_metadata_enabled = true
      
    • neutron.conf
              core_plugin = neutron.plugins.ml2.plugin.Ml2Plugin
       	service_plugins = networking_ovn.l3.l3_ovn.OVNL3RouterPlugin
      
  • For the metadata agent container (running on the compute nodes) it was necessary to configure it to point at the nova metadata service with the appropriate shared key as well as how to communicate with OVS running on each of the compute nodes
            nova_metadata_host = 172.30.0.101
     	metadata_proxy_shared_secret = <SECRET>
     	bridge_mappings = physnet1:br-ex
     	datapath_type = system
     	ovsdb_connection = tcp:127.0.0.1:6640
     	local_ip = 172.30.0.101
    

For the OVN specific containers – ovn-northd, ovn-sb and ovn-nb databases, it was necessary to ensure that they had the correct configuration at startup; specifically, that they knew how to communicate with the relevant dbs. Hence, start commands such as

/usr/sbin/ovsdb-server /var/lib/openvswitch/ovnnb.db -vconsole:emer -vsyslog:err -vfile:info --remote=punix:/run/openvswitch/ovnnb_db.sock --remote=ptcp:$ovnnb_port:$ovsdb_ip --unixctl=/run/openvswitch/ovnnb_db.ctl --log-file=/var/log/kolla/openvswitch/ovsdb-server-nb.log

were necessary (for the ovn northbound database) and we had to modify the container start process accordingly.

It was also necessary to update the neutron database to support OVN specific versioning information: this was straightforward using the following command:

docker exec -ti neutron-server-ovn_neutron_server_ovn_1 neutron-db-manage upgrade heads

The last issue which we had to overcome was that Kolla and neutron OVN had slightly different views regarding the naming of the external bridges. Kolla-ansible configured a connection between the br-ex and br-int OVS bridges on the controller node with port names phy-br-ex and int-br-ex respectively. OVN also created ports with the same purpose but with different names patch-provnet-<UUID>-to-br-int and patch-br-int-to-provonet-<UUID>; as these ports had the same purpose, our somewhat hacky solution was to manually remove the the ports created in the first instance by Kolla-ansible.

Having overcome all these steps, it was possible to launch a VM which had external network connectivity and to which a floating IP address could be assigned.

Clearly, this approach is not realistic for supporting a production environment, but it’s an appropriate level of hackery for a testbed.

Other noteworthy issues which arose during this work include the following:

  • Standard docker apparmor configuration in ubuntu is such that mount cannot be run inside containers, even if they have the appropriate privileges. This has to be disabled or else it is necessary to ensure that the containers do not use the default docker apparmor profile.
  • A specific issue with mounts inside a container which resulted in the mount table filling up with 65536 mounts and rendering the host quite unusable (thanks to Stefan for providing a bit more detail on this) – the workaround was to ensure that /run/netns was bind mounted into the container.
  • As we used geneve encapsulation, geneve kernel modules had to be loaded
  • Full datapath NAT support is only available for linux kernel 4.6 and up. We had to upgrade the 4.4 kernel which came with our standard ubuntu 16.04 environment.

This is certainly not a complete guide to how to get Openstack up and running with OVN, but may be useful to some folks who are toying with this. In future, we’re going to experiment with extending OVN to an edge networking context and will provide more details as this work evolves.

 

Enhancing OpenStack Swift to support edge computing context

As the trend continues to move towards Serverless Computing, Edge Computing and Functions as a Service (FaaS), the need for a storage system that can adapt to these architectures grows ever bigger. In a scenario where smart cars have to make decisions on a whim, there is no chance for that car to ask a data center what to do in this scenario. These scenarios constitute a driver for new storage solutions in more distributed architectures. In our work, we have been considering a scenario in which there is a distributed storage solution which exposes different local endpoints to applications distributed over a mix of cloud and local resources; such applications can give the storage infrastructure and indicator of the nature of the data which can then be used to determine where it should be stored. For example, data could be considered to be either latency-sensitive (in which case the storage system should try to store it as locally as possible) or loss sensitive (in which case the storage system should ensure it is on reliable storage). Continue reading

Cyclops 3.0 release with rule engine

Our flagship open-source framework for cloud billing – Cyclops has matured to version 3.0 today. Over the past several months, Cyclops team at SPLab has gathered community feedback, updated the architecture, changed the database backends and improved the reliability of the framework.

Cyclops 3.0 release includes:

  • New pricing and billing rule engine
  • PostgreSQL/TimescaleDB database backend
  • HTTPS support and message acknowledgments
  • More robust and failure resilient microservices

Continue reading

Openshift 3.6 on Openstack – developer cluster setup

The ECRP Project uses Kubernetes/Openshift as the base for its Cloud-Robotics PaaS.  Apart from running robotic applications distributed across robots and clouds, we wanted to assess whether latency to the closest public data-center (Frankfurt for both AWS and GKE) would be low enough to run common SLAM and navigation apps. The short answer is YES, although our work there continues.

Thanks to the work of Seán, Bruno, and Remo, the ICCLab has a brand new Openstack cluster. The Cloud-Robotics crew decided to take it for a spin, and use some research grant money on public clouds also for other activities (e.g., FaaS / Serverless computing).

Continue reading

How to Write a Cinder Driver

After too many hours of trial and error and searching for the right solution on how to properly write and integrate your own backend in cinder, here are all the steps and instructions necessary. So if you are looking for a guide on how to integrate your own cinder driver, look no further. Continue reading

15th OpenStack Meetup

On the 21st of March we held the 15th OpenStack meetup. As ever, the talks were interesting, relevant and entertaining. It was kindly sponsored by Rackspace and held at their offices in Zürich. Much thanks goes to them and to previous sponsors!

At this meetup there were 2 talks and an interactive and impromptu panel discussion on the recent operator’s meetup in Milan.

The first talk was by Giuseppe Paterno who shared the experience in eBay on the workloads that are running there upon OpenStack.

Next up was Geoff Higginbottom from Rackspace who showed how to use Nagios and StackStorm to automate the recovery of OpenStack services. This was interesting from the lab’s perspective as much of what Geoff talked about was related to our Cloud Incident Management initiative. You can see almost the same talk that Geoff gave at the OpenStack Nordic Days.

The two presentations were followed up by the panel discussion involving those that attended  including our own Seán Murphy and was moderated by Andy Edmonds. Finally, as is now almost a tradition, we had a very nice apero!

Looking forward to the next and 16th OpenStack meetup!

On-storage computation for a serverless environment

The serverless architecture is getting a lot of attention and there is a lot of talk going on about it (forbes, gigaom, techbeacon). This new architecture is especially useful for developers since there is no need to worry about deployment or interactions between different servers. The developer only needs to worry about the code, a function. Functions are the way applications are written in this architecture, otherwise known as Function as a Service (FaaS).

Continue reading

Monitoring an Openstack deployment with Prometheus and Grafana

Following our previous blog post, we are still looking at tools for collecting metrics from an Openstack deployment in order to understand its resource utilization. Although Monasca has a comprehensive set of metrics and alarm definitions, the complex installation process combined with a lack of documentation makes it a frustrating experience to get it up and running. Further, although it is complex, with many moving parts, it was difficult to configure it to obtain the analysis we wanted from the raw data, viz how many of our servers are overloaded over different timescales in different respects (cpu, memory, disk io, network io). For these reasons we decided to try Prometheus with Grafana which turned out to be much easier to install and configure (taking less than an hour to set up!). This blog post covers the installation process and configuration of Prometheus and Grafana in a Docker container and how to install and configure Canonical’s Prometheus Openstack exporter to collect a small set of metrics related to an Openstack deployment.

Continue reading

Installing Monasca – a happy ending after much sadness and woe

In one of our projects we are making contributions to an Openstack project called Watcher, this project focuses on optimizing resource utilization of a cloud according to a given strategy. As part of this work it is important to understand the resource utilization of the cloud beforehand in order to make a meaningful contribution. This requires collection of metrics from the system and processing them to understand how the system is performing. The Ceilometer project was our default choice for collecting metrics in an Openstack deployment but as work has evolved we are also exploring alternatives – specifically Monasca. In this blog post I will cover my personal experience installing Monasca (which was more challenging than expected) and how we hacked the monasca/demo docker image to connect it to our Openstack deployment. Continue reading

Openstack Summit Barcelona 2016 – Day 3

The third day of the summit had a different feel from the previous couple of days – there was no keynote and there were noticeably less people around: there is a strong sense that the show is over and now it’s necessary to do some real work. Hence, there is more time and space allocated to the project teams to enable them to move their work forward.

img_20161025_112030 Continue reading