Orran Krieger
unread,Jan 20, 2015, 7:42:43 PM1/20/15Sign in to reply to author
Sign in to forward
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to Ian Denhardt, George Silvis III, moc-te...@googlegroups.com, Piyanai Saowarattitada, Nick Amento
Okay, I don't think we should mess with the existing running environment, so we should just replace the messed up switch. However, it would be good to wire additional NICs on a couple of other nodes to the 10Gig network if we have available ports. That way we can set up a new controller on one of the other nodes, and then take over the other compute. I would, in a new setup, isolate the external networking from the tenant networks those controllers.
Nick, is this an option, i.e., can we wire some of the other NICs to additional ports on the 10Gig network for a couple of other compute? We spent over a week until we found a kernel bug that was because we where using a single NIC for both tenant networks and external networks on the controller node. While we fixed (turned off TCP receiver offload) it would be nice to have the extra bandwidth and be deploying things in a better supported configuration.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MOC technical" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
moc-technica...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/optout.