XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Rename Networks on XO Hosts

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Xen Orchestra
    20 Posts 7 Posters 3.9k Views 2 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • G Offline
      guiltykeyboard
      last edited by

      Is it possible to rename networks on XO Hosts?

      For example, "Pool-wide network associated with eth2" is not very descriptive. Can we rename these to something friendly like "Vlan35" or "Storage Network"? If so, how would this be done?

      Also, the (i) button at the bottom right corner under networks on a host redirects to a 404 page on XO-Server 5.51.1 / XO-Web 5.51.0. It points here.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • BenjiReisB Offline
        BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
        last edited by

        Hi!

        In your Pool view there's a network tab where you can rename your networks by clicking on their name and enter a new one.

        Regards.

        G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
        • G Offline
          guiltykeyboard @BenjiReis
          last edited by

          @BenjiReis Thanks! I was looking in host-view and couldn't find this.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • olivierlambertO Offline
            olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
            last edited by

            Remember a network is a pool wide object 🙂 That's why it's in Pool view 🙂

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • ForzaF Offline
              Forza
              last edited by

              Can we have a network name assigned to different pifs on different hosts?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • olivierlambertO Offline
                olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                last edited by

                @S-Pam not sure to get it. A network is a shared object between hosts in a pool (like a shared SR if you like).

                A network is connected to each host via a PIF (or a bond).

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • ForzaF Offline
                  Forza
                  last edited by Forza

                  What I mean is this:

                  Host1:
                  eth0: management
                  eth1: lan
                  eth2: dedicated application 1 (not available on host 2)
                  eth3: dedicated application 2 (not available on host 2)

                  Host2:
                  eth0: management
                  eth1: lan
                  eth2: not-used
                  eth3: local storage-network (not available on host 1)

                  However, at the moment it is not possible to name the networks like that.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • olivierlambertO Offline
                    olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                    last edited by

                    Because you are asking for an anti-pattern.

                    If a network is meant to be only available on one host, create an host internal network instead. It won't be attached to any real PIF, so you can name it as you like.

                    ForzaF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • ForzaF Offline
                      Forza @olivierlambert
                      last edited by

                      Those applications need access to those physical networks.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • olivierlambertO Offline
                        olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                        last edited by olivierlambert

                        If you use a pool, it's for sharing a network and/or a storage.

                        If you don't want to share a network across PIFs between hosts, then don't use a pool 🙂

                        ForzaF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • ForzaF Offline
                          Forza @olivierlambert
                          last edited by Forza

                          @olivierlambert said in Rename Networks on XO Hosts:

                          If you use a pool, it's for sharing a network and/or a storage.

                          If you don't want to share a network across PIFs between hosts, then don't use a pool 🙂

                          I get it. Though I would prefer not having to buy another server when I can run a VM. And in fact it works fine, just naming networks is a little odd at the moment.

                          What I would like to see is that networks can be connected to different physical nics on different hosts.

                          I.e. something like this:

                          Network Management:
                          Host 1: eth0
                          Host 2: eth1
                          Host 3: eth0
                          Host 4: eth4

                          Network Someother:
                          Host 1: eth1
                          Host 2: n/a
                          Host 3: eth1
                          Host 4: eth1

                          Network Another:
                          Host 1: eth2
                          Host 2: eth2
                          Host 3: eth2
                          Host 4: eth2

                          Then in the VM you can assign the "Network" as normal. If the VM is migrated to another host, then XCP-ng would choose the correct PIF/NIC. This can be an advantage where one or several hosts have extra NICs, maybe with higher speeds. But during migration (rolling upgrades, service, or whatnot), the VMs still work but with reduced performance when moved to another host.

                          Another example would be if we have a spare host off-site/another building where the network layout cannot be fully replicated as in the datacenter.

                          eda84dcd-ba54-419f-83a1-3b37bc62ae94-image.png

                          JoeyDee518J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • olivierlambertO Offline
                            olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                            last edited by

                            I have hard time to follow your idea, at least it's completely alien to the concept of pool. Maybe @fohdeesha can help in there.

                            fohdeeshaF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • fohdeeshaF Offline
                              fohdeesha Vates 🪐 Pro Support Team @olivierlambert
                              last edited by

                              @olivierlambert I believe he means be able to rename / map a hosts physical interfaces to different namings. For instance on host 1, "network 0 / eth0" would be mapped to the physical eth0 interface, but on another host in the pool with a different NIC configuration, he could map the same pool "network 0 / eth0" to the server's physical eth1.

                              @S-Pam this certainly isn't currently supported, I believe it would take a lot of rewriting the network backend to make it possible.

                              ForzaF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • ForzaF Offline
                                Forza @fohdeesha
                                last edited by

                                @fohdeesha Yes, you are right. That's what precisely what I meant.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • JoeyDee518J Offline
                                  JoeyDee518 @Forza
                                  last edited by JoeyDee518

                                  @s-pam said in Rename Networks on XO Hosts:

                                  @olivierlambert said in Rename Networks on XO Hosts:

                                  If you use a pool, it's for sharing a network and/or a storage.

                                  If you don't want to share a network across PIFs between hosts, then don't use a pool 🙂

                                  I get it. Though I would prefer not having to buy another server when I can run a VM. And in fact it works fine, just naming networks is a little odd at the moment.

                                  What I would like to see is that networks can be connected to different physical nics on different hosts.

                                  I.e. something like this:

                                  Network Management:
                                  Host 1: eth0
                                  Host 2: eth1
                                  Host 3: eth0
                                  Host 4: eth4

                                  Network Someother:
                                  Host 1: eth1
                                  Host 2: n/a
                                  Host 3: eth1
                                  Host 4: eth1

                                  Network Another:
                                  Host 1: eth2
                                  Host 2: eth2
                                  Host 3: eth2
                                  Host 4: eth2

                                  Then in the VM you can assign the "Network" as normal. If the VM is migrated to another host, then XCP-ng would choose the correct PIF/NIC. This can be an advantage where one or several hosts have extra NICs, maybe with higher speeds. But during migration (rolling upgrades, service, or whatnot), the VMs still work but with reduced performance when moved to another host.

                                  Another example would be if we have a spare host off-site/another building where the network layout cannot be fully replicated as in the datacenter.

                                  eda84dcd-ba54-419f-83a1-3b37bc62ae94-image.png

                                  Did you ever find a solution to this? I'm literally trying to do the same thing because I have hosts with uneven numbers of NICs...

                                  ForzaF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • ForzaF Offline
                                    Forza @JoeyDee518
                                    last edited by

                                    @joeydee518 no.

                                    JoeyDee518J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • JoeyDee518J Offline
                                      JoeyDee518 @Forza
                                      last edited by

                                      @s-pam Yikes, thanks for the reply!

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • olivierlambertO Offline
                                        olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                                        last edited by

                                        Any idea @fohdeesha ?

                                        fohdeeshaF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • fohdeeshaF Offline
                                          fohdeesha Vates 🪐 Pro Support Team @olivierlambert
                                          last edited by

                                          @olivierlambert like I said in my previous reply I believe this would take quite a bit of rewriting in XAPI to accommodate pools with mismatched hardware. The interface rename tool might work in the meantime? https://xcp-ng.org/docs/networking.html#renaming-nics

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • ben20benB Offline
                                            ben20ben
                                            last edited by

                                            I came across this and the solution I upvoted i.e. renaming in pool view, works for me. However, I would like to +1 the idea @Forza put in his post. Cause organizing it all can get quite confusing. XOA being the excellent tool that it is, has this lacking.

                                            For those who come across this and feel discouraged? Do please mention your needs to the team here! They are VERY good at putting these kinds of things on the roadmap if there is a need/want for it!

                                            For myself, I use a spreadsheet to keep track of networks, hosts and pools. I do not rely on XOA alone. Which tbh is probably best practice anyway, in case a backup fails or the world blows up.

                                            👽

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post