Bug 618636 - PRD33 - [RFE] Add multiple network gateways to the Host
Summary: PRD33 - [RFE] Add multiple network gateways to the Host
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager
Classification: Red Hat
Component: RFEs
Version: 2.2.2
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: 3.3.0
Assignee: Assaf Muller
QA Contact: Martin Pavlik
URL: http://www.ovirt.org/Features/Multipl...
Whiteboard: network
: 675760 786052 786053 (view as bug list)
Depends On: 975759 977856 984028 994523
Blocks: 786053 977207 1019470
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-07-27 12:42 UTC by Avi Tal
Modified: 2019-04-28 10:05 UTC (History)
17 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 3.3.0, IS6
Doc Type: Release Note
Doc Text:
Users can now define a gateway for each logical network on a host. This feature is beneficial for deployments in which a host has more than one network device. Any traffic that has to be returned to a network outside the host's subnets will be routed back via the device through which the traffic came, instead of the host's default gateway.
Clone Of:
: 977207 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-01-21 17:05:46 UTC
oVirt Team: Network
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
danken: Triaged+

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Knowledge Base (Solution) 118583 0 None None None Never
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2014:0038 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Important: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager 3.3.0 update 2014-01-21 22:03:06 UTC
oVirt gerrit 15207 0 None None None Never
oVirt gerrit 15335 0 None None None Never
oVirt gerrit 15528 0 None None None Never
oVirt gerrit 16461 0 None None None Never
oVirt gerrit 16552 0 None None None Never
oVirt gerrit 16629 0 None None None Never
oVirt gerrit 16692 0 None None None Never

Description Avi Tal 2010-07-27 12:42:52 UTC 
The only GW in the host is used by rhevm network.
We should support adding more GW's according to our network configurations.
Comment 1 Yaniv Kaul 2010-07-27 12:58:09 UTC 
(In reply to comment #0)
> The only GW in the host is used by rhevm network.
> We should support adding more GW's according to our network configurations. 

That is - per interface. Each interface will have its own gateway.
Comment 2 Itamar Heim 2010-07-27 13:41:53 UTC 
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > The only GW in the host is used by rhevm network.
> > We should support adding more GW's according to our network configurations. 
> 
> That is - per interface. Each interface will have its own gateway.    

actually, should the gateway be defined at the logical network level, rather than at per host level?
Comment 3 Yaniv Kaul 2010-07-27 15:31:27 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > (In reply to comment #0)
> > > The only GW in the host is used by rhevm network.
> > > We should support adding more GW's according to our network configurations. 
> > 
> > That is - per interface. Each interface will have its own gateway.    
> 
> actually, should the gateway be defined at the logical network level, rather
> than at per host level?    

Really depends what we do with the data at the logical network level. It seems that today - nothing. It would have been nice, that when a user selects the logical network a NIC is connected to, the information would be automatically copied from the logic network settings. The gateway and netmask for sure, the IP can be partially (based on the netmask).
Comment 7 Robert Allton 2010-08-12 12:31:01 UTC 
Maybe the real problem is that when adding a new Logical Network in the RHEV-M GUI, one of the boxes you can fill out is Default Gateway.

Putting an entry in is optional but is causing a lot of confusion. If you enter a value it overrides the Default Gateway currently setup.

So maybe we need to simply remove Default Gateway as an option when adding a new Logical Network?
Comment 8 Simon Grinberg 2011-02-07 20:43:05 UTC 
*** Bug 675760 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 10 Itamar Heim 2013-01-14 15:57:46 UTC 
simon - can you please explain how this bug and bug 786052 co-exist?
Comment 16 lpeer 2013-05-30 12:24:54 UTC 
*** Bug 786052 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 17 Sadique Puthen 2013-05-30 12:46:41 UTC 
*** Bug 786053 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 19 errata-xmlrpc 2014-01-21 17:05:46 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2014-0038.html
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.