Bug 1273327 : added troubleshooting for virtual networking #1923
Conversation
bfallonf
changed the title
|
Given the thumbs in the BZ from the reporter. Asking for a peer review! |
admin_guide/sdn_troubleshooting.adoc
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My understanding is that eth0 is an example of an interface. Suggest either using a different example, or dropping it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reading further, i see that "network MTU" is a shorthand for "MTU of the primary network interface". I suppose if everyone knows that, then there is no need to change the example (please disregard previous line-comment).
Still, might be a good idea to mark up eth0, like eth0.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or maybe make the parenthetical more clear, like "(for example, on the eth0 interface)".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fixed the markup, and made it a little clearer.
|
@bfallonf Small quibble, otherwise LGTM. 👍 |
|
@bfallonf Labels and milestones are missing, but LGTM otherwise. |
admin_guide/sdn_troubleshooting.adoc
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add manual/unique IDs for all headings.
If there's a worthwhile way we can have some intro matter here so that it doesn't go from one heading straight to a subheading, that might be cool.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@adellape I don't think putting in words "just because" is a good idea. Unless you think it's not clear what virtual network means?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bfallonf Not just because, hence "if there's a worthwhile way". Not a big deal, just thought I'd mention.
|
@bfallonf Some comments inline, also squash reminder. 👍 |
admin_guide/sdn_troubleshooting.adoc
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
EDIT: ok, I was wrong, we talked about setting the MTU automatically, but that's actually still an RFE. So yes, you need to make sure (as you note below) that the node's configured MTU is at least 50 less than the MTU of the network interface openshift is told to use.
|
@tnguyen-rh @adellape @ahardin-rh Suggestions done. Let me know if there's anything else. |
|
@bfallonf LGTM. You'll need to rebase to pick up the Travis fix. Also, this topic was not in the OSE 3.0 docs so you can remove the enterprise-3.0 label. |
…d edits after review
bfallonf
changed the title
|
@adellape Cool. Done. I'll merge away. |
|
[rev_history] |
|
@adellape Why should this not be in the 3.2 branch? Should this not be in future releases? |
|
@bfallonf We haven't actually created an enterprise-3.2 branch yet, but we will this week (after the week's publishing settle). The enterprise-3.2 branch will be created initially from the enterprise-3.1 branch, so it'll have everything in there already including this commit (after it's picked in this week's release). So I was just removing the 3.2 label here cuz it was sorta redundant; though I coulda just left it, wasn't hurting anything... |
|
@adellape Gotcha. |
5 participants
Added section on troubleshooting virtual networking to troubleshooting SDN file.