Thanks to you all! You confirmed everything I thought I knew, but it is nice to be sure! On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Mike Dawson <mike.dawson at cloudapt.com>wrote: > Travis, > > We run a routed ECMP spine-leaf network architecture with Ceph and have no > issues on the network side whatsoever. Each leaf switch has an L2 cidr > block inside a common L3 supernet. > > We do not currently split cluster_network and public_network. If we did, > we'd likely build a separate spine-leaf network with it's own L3 supernet. > > A simple IPv4 example: > > - ceph-cluster: 10.1.0.0/16 > - cluster-leaf1: 10.1.1.0/24 > - node1: 10.1.1.1/24 > - node2: 10.1.1.2/24 > - cluster-leaf2: 10.1.2.0/24 > > - ceph-public: 10.2.0.0/16 > - public-leaf1: 10.2.1.0/24 > - node1: 10.2.1.1/24 > - node2: 10.2.1.2/24 > - public-leaf2: 10.2.2.0/24 > > ceph.conf would be: > > cluster_network: 10.1.0.0/255.255.0.0 > public_network: 10.2.0.0/255.255.0.0 > > - Mike Dawson > > > On 5/28/2014 1:01 PM, Travis Rhoden wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> Does anybody know if there are any issues running Ceph with multiple L2 >> LAN segements? I'm picturing a large multi-rack/multi-row deployment >> where you may give each rack (or row) it's own L2 segment, then connect >> them all with L3/ECMP in a leaf-spine architecture. >> >> I'm wondering how cluster_network (or public_network) in ceph.conf works >> in this case. Does that directive just tell a daemon starting on a >> particular node which network to bind to? Or is a CIDR that has to be >> accurate for every OSD and MON in the entire cluster? >> >> Thanks, >> >> - Travis >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list >> ceph-users at lists.ceph.com >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/attachments/20140528/e58e103f/attachment.htm>
 |