Federated Cloud siteconf

From EGIWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Overview For users For resource providers Infrastructure status Site-specific configuration Architecture



Contents


Follow-up

Site-specific configuration

The main purpose of this page is to collect site-specific configuration parameters of the Federated Cloud sites, allowing comparison among them, identify differences, get parameters for a specific site.

If you have any comments on the content of this page, please contact operations @ egi.eu.

Parameters provided by each site are:

Last update: September 2017


default network name default network type public network name is outgoing connectivity guaranteed by default at start time? port default firewall policy ports firewall configuration ports default CMF policy ports policy on CMF mandatory closed ports port configuration requests method users requests comments
100IT private private public YES * all open
all closed
none OpenStack Horizon, GGUS
* Outgoing connectivity is available if an IP address is assigned to the VM's virtual router (this is the case by default). Users can disable this if desired.
BEgrid-BELNET /network/1 public /network/1 YES all closed 22, ICMP


GGUS ticket 80, 8080, 443 some users have requested to limit access to their VMs to a given list of source IPs
CESGA https://fedcloud-services.egi.cesga.es:11443/network/1
public https://fedcloud-services.egi.cesga.es:11443/network/1
YES
all open
all open
NA (no OpenStack)
NA (no OpenStack)
none
GGUS
Static DHCP server (IP assigned if network contextualization fails)

CESNET-MetaCloud https://carach5.ics.muni.cz:11443/network/24
public
public
YES
all open
all open
all open
all open
67/udp, 137/udp
GGUS
One request to provide a private network.
As soon as security groups are implemented in OCCI, we will switch to a more restrictive mode where only TCP 22 is open by default. Users will have a self-service control over this via OCCI.
CLOUDIFIN /occi1.1/network/500ed7e7-162e-4d97-916e-bc7bc3ab9b41
private
/occi1.1/network/PUBLIC
Yes
all open
all open
all open
all open

GGUS

As we well know by using occi we can create, destroy VMs, attach link networks.
Would it not be possible to access (ssh) VMs with private ip through occi?
CYFRONET-CLOUD fedcloud.egi.eu-internal-net
private
public
YES
all open
all open
all open
all open

GGUS


FZJ /network/PRIVATE
private
/network/PUBLIC
YES all closed
22, 80, 443, 7000-7020
all closed
all closed, except for 22, 80, 443, 7000-7020
25
Openstack Horizon portal, GGUS
3306, redirected to 7000; 25 (from the inside), redirected to 587.
Ports 7000-7020 have been defined by our network security team. We have so far redirected any requests for other ports to this range. There was a debate once when users insisted on port 3306 for MySQL, however we convinced them that their client was flawed by not supporting other ports. In the same way, users expected to be able to send email via port 25, we convinced them that port 587 is intended for that purpose.
GoeGrid https://occi.cloud.gwdg.de:3100/network/36
public
https://occi.cloud.gwdg.de:3100/network/36
YES all closed
22, 80, 443, ICMP
all open
all open
none
GGUS


HG-09-Okeanos-Cloud public
public
public
yes all open
all open
Not Available
Not Available
None
GGUS

All newly created VMs are getting a public IPv4 and public IPv6 address
IFCA-LCG2 provider-<project VLAN ID>
private
external
NO all open

all closed
any

OpenStack Horizon, GGUS


IISAS-FedCloud /occi1.1/network/14bd3bc2-5f1a-4948-b94e-bc95e56122e5
public
/occi1.1/network/14bd3bc2-5f1a-4948-b94e-bc95e56122e5
YES all open

all closed 22,ICMP open

Openstack Horizon portal, GGUS

network connections should be monitored, unusual activities (e.g. very high volumes/frequency connections) should raise alarms
IISAS-Nebula https://nebula2.ui.savba.sk:11443/network/1
public
https://nebula2.ui.savba.sk:11443/network/1
YES all open

all closed 22, ICMP open

GGUS


IISAS-GPUCloud https://nova3.ui.savba.sk:8787/occi1.1/network/PUBLIC
public https://nova3.ui.savba.sk:8787/occi1.1/network/PUBLIC
YES all open

all closed 22, ICMP open
Openstack Horizon portal, GGUS
port 8899 by enmr.eu
network connections should be monitored, unusual activities (e.g. very high volumes/frequency connections) should raise alarms
IN2P3-IRES /occi1.1/network/9a393ad0-057e-4d74-8a50-1818114caaba
private
/occi1.1/network/PUBLIC
Yes
all closed
22/80/443/8080 and ICMP open
Ports 22/tcp and ICMP open by default. Users have the ability to use additional security group to open other ports.

21, 25
OpenStack for 80/443/8080, GGUS otherwise

user are not allowed to create / modify / delete security groups (in particular in a catch-all VO). Comment from the ticket: There is no name for the default network. In deed, with OpenStack and OOI, private networks does not have default name (like the public one). Each private network has its own ID (it is different for each project / VO.
INFN-CATANIA-STACK
public


all open
all open



Horizon Dashboard, GGUS

INFN-PADOVA-STACK /occi1.1/network/<UUID of the internal project network>
private
/occi1.1/network/PUBLIC
YES
all closed
22 open
al closed
22 open

GGUS
upon request: 8899 (from a given IM/EC3 server), 80 to be negotiated

RECAS-BARI /occi/network/fe82ef7b-4bb7-4c1e-b4ec-ec5c1b0c7333
public
public_net
YES all open except port 111

all closed
ssh (22) open
none
Horizon Dashboard, GGUS several ports because fedcloud users are currently running different services: web portals and applications (80/8080,443), onedata (9443), hadoop, elasticsearch, etc.
Finally we are configuring the private network in the new tenants with the latest version of ooi (1.1.2) that fixes a bug in the listing of networks. So now newly created tenants will also have a private network (isolated) as well as the public one (shared). We encourage you to use the private network whenever this is compatible with the architecture of the virtual infrastructure being deployed. If needed, we can provide direct access to the private network via our VPN (accessible with personal credentials).
SCAI public
public
public
Yes
all closed
ICMP, 22, 80, 443 open
all open
none
none
GGUS

Temporary configuration, because prior configuration with default routed internal network (VxLan) and optional public provider network didn't work, couldn't attach floating public IP through OCCI (worked through horizon).
TR-FC1-ULAKBIM http://fcctrl.ulakbim.gov.tr:8787/occi1.2/network/ed61199b-baac-4524-b801-324f341b0d89 for fedcloud.egi.eu
private
http://fcctrl.ulakbim.gov.tr:8787/occi1.2/network/ed61199b-baac-4524-b801-324f341b0d89

http://fcctrl.ulakbim.gov.tr:8787/occi1.2/network/PUBLIC

yes all closed 22, 443, ICMP open all closed
22, ICMP open
None
GGUS 443

UPV-GRyCAP private private /network/6 yes all closed 22, 443 NA NA None GGUS, email
At this point we are considering the option of migrating to OpenStack
NCG-INGRID-PT <PROJECTNAME>_private_net
private
public_net

all open

Ports 22/tcp and ICMP open by default. Users have the ability to use additional security group to open other ports.
Horizon Dashboard, GGUS

Horizon Dashboard, GGUS


MK-04-FINKICLOUD public
public
public
YES
all closed
ICMP, 22, 80, 443 open
Ports 22/ICMP, 22, 80, 443 are open by default. User can add additional security group for opening another port.
none
none
GGUS ticket
none


Upgrade campaigns and surveys

cASO upgrade

Started on September 21st, 2017.Still open.

The APEL team would like to encourage OpenStack sites to upgrade their version of caso to this version https://appdb.egi.eu/store/software/caso/releases/1.x/1.1.1/ Sites that are currently running 1.0.X or were running it in the past should upgrade and republish the period that 1.0.X was in use. Sites that never run 1.0.X, i.e. they went straight to 1.1.0 or never moved away from the older 0.X.X versions, don’t need to republish, they only need to upgrade.

Resource Centre Ticket Status comments
100IT https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130665 CLOSED We were running Caso 1.1.0, and have now upgraded to 1.1.1. No republishing needed.
CYFRONET-CLOUD https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130666 OPEN No reply.
FZJ https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130667 ON HOLD We're currently running cASO 0.3.0. When trying to run cASO 1.1.1, I have trouble extracting records due to "MissingAuthPlugin: An auth plugin is required to determine endpoint URL". I have to put this on hold due to other, more important obligations.
IFCA-LCG2 https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130668 CLOSED already running caso 1.1.1
IISAS-FedCloud https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130669 CLOSED cASO v1.1.1 is already installed. Previous version was 0.3.2.
IISAS-GPUCloud https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130670 CLOSED cASO v1.1.1 is already installed. Previous version was 0.3.2.
INFN-CATANIA-STACK https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130671 OPEN Experiencing issues with the configuration of the new installation, following on the fedcloud list.
RECAS-BARI https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130672 OPEN In progress
INFN-PADOVA-STACK https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130673 CLOSED at the time of the CASO update the accounting data were not

published since a couple of weeks due to a nfs failure. After the update

and nfs repair, the old accounting data were properly pushed towards 

the accounting DB. Looking at the accounting portal the usage of September seems inline with the previous months, so i think that a re-publication is not needed.

TR-FC1-ULAKBIM https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130674 CLOSED We are using fedcloud appliance for caso. Our version is caso-0.3.2. We will update as soon as possible. -> We have updated our fedcloud appliance with the latest docker image fedcloud/caso. Now it is caso-1.1.1-py2.7. No republishing needed.
IN2P3-IRES https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130675 CLOSED I have republished the data, but it is still wrong :-/ We may close this ticket. I have another ticket for the accounting issue:
https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130327
NCG-INGRID-PT https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130676 CLOSED No accounting at the site.
SCAI https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130677 CLOSED we went directly to caso 1.1.0 and skipped 1.0.X, so we should not be affected by republishing. We did the upgrade yesterday.  Upgraded to caso 1.1.1
CLOUDIFIN https://ggus.eu/index.php?mode=ticket_info&ticket_id=130678 CLOSED After upgrade (from cASO 0.3.3) we have cASO 1.1.1.

Switching to default private network

Started on October 2nd, 2017. Direct emails used, no tickets. Still open.

Resource Centre Result Details Comments, feedback, requests
CESNET-MetaCloud Will switch to private

CESNET-MetaCloud will enter the site decommissioning process shortly. The newly built and registered site (name still TBD) will follow this private-by-default configuration.

  • What does 'private' actually mean? Private with NAT or without?
    These have different configuration and user expectations.
    * On OpenNebula, having private-by-default and attaching public means
    having two interfaces in the virtual machine. Are endorsed images
    ready for this?
    Can user applications work in a multi-home
    environment?
    * In case of combining private with NAT and public on a single machine, users will run into routing issues unless they adjust routing metrics. This can be handled in the appliance, however the appliance
    must be ready for this. DHCP alone doesn't support setting routing metrics, so we as a provider cannot do this from the outside.
  • As apparent from the above, using this approach will highlight CMF-specific behaviors in networking.
CESGA
Will switch to private

I agree about the benefits of using a private IP pool.

To implement the change:

1- I will change the IPs assigned of the current default virtualnet from the public IP pool to the private one. In this manner will be not necessary change the current MVs templates.

2- Create a new virtualnet with the old public IPs pool assigned.

In order to allow the site ask for a public IP (in a standardized manner), please clarify me if any condition is mandatory, as for example the name for the public virtualnet or so on...

SCAI
Trying to switch to private, network configuration issues
we had private networks (OVS VXLAN tenant networks) as a default before we switched to mitaka, but since mitaka we had problems that it didn't work to associate a floating IP through OCCI. We tried to switch back recently but we now have problems getting the tenant networks to work (we get no connectivity through the VXLAN tunnel). If we can fix that we will change directly.
MK-04-FINKICLOUD



RECAS-BARI
Cannot switch to private
At RECAS-BARI we have implemented a particular setup of the networking service provided by the CMF Openstack: a public network is shared and visible across all the tenants whereas isolated private networks can be added in each tenant. It is not possible to hide the public network and it is not possible to limit the number of public IPs to be assigned to tenants. This configuration is different from the most common setup used in Openstack where an external network is used to provision floating IPs with a dedicated quota. Our approach, even if less common, guarantees better performances and user experience (in the past we provided floating IPs using overlay networks and our users were not happy with stability and performances). 


Now coming to the point about application portability, I think that this can be achieved in two ways:
1) asking sites to change their settings in order to achieve a sort of homogeneity;
2) accepting sites heterogeneity: publish site networking information, provide best practices and recipes (if needed) for the users.   

Following the first path (as you are doing) can be too invasive for sites since you are asking them to change their policies or configurations and in some cases there might be technical issues that prevent sites from changing the default configuration as in our case.
The second approach would not require any critical change at site level: the site networking characteristics might be published so that users or higher-level tools can easily retrieve that information; moreover the users should be enforced to follow some simple best practices. 
For example, one of the problems that EGI users encounter when we configure the additional private network in the tenant is that they get the “Multiple networks” error from occi while creating a virtual server. In fact, they are not used to specify the network and in some cases they do not know how to do that.
Therefore today an application written for sites with the default Openstack configuration is not portable on our cloud but it might become specifying always the network (also for the default Openstack configuration). Of course this is just an example, for other aspects there might be the need for better abstraction at higher level (federation) in order to provide users with transparent access to the resources of the sites.
INFN-CATANIA-STACK
Can switch to private we can switch to assign private IPs without problems. how the user can access to a VM that has a private IP when the public
one is not needed?
IISAS-*
Can switch to private
for the IISAS cloud sites, there are no real technical problems preventing us to change the default network to private IPs.
The main problem for us is potential disruption of important services hosting on the site during the change, therefore we must carefully make plan ahead before switching.
HG-09-Okeanos-Cloud



GoeGrid



BEgrid-BELNET
Will deploy the private setup and make some tests

We are running out of public IPs, and we also understand the security concern with having public IPs by default.

On each hypervisor, we will create an isolated bridge with OVS, and then these bridges will be connected to each others with GRE tunnels in a full-mesh topology.

It is not yet entirely clear how users will be able to access their VMs in the private network. The scenario where the users adds a new public nic dynamically to his VM has to be carefully tested because adding a new nic triggers some changes in the network configuration (default route,....). We need to understand how the operating system handles this.
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox
Print/export