Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Support for centralized NAT #73

Open
lightning1 opened this issue Jan 31, 2017 · 2 comments
Open

Support for centralized NAT #73

lightning1 opened this issue Jan 31, 2017 · 2 comments
Assignees
@lightning1
Labels
feature help wanted meta-issue prio:high topic:nat

Comments

@lightning1
Copy link
Member

There need to be major changes to the model and the ui including:

  • decentralized VLANs, that are just unique per building
  • private subnets on a per-user-basis
  • a central public ip pool
  • management of network translations
  • port forwardings to allow services behind the NAT
  • usage of an API provided by the NAT gateway

Additional improvements may include:

  • simplifying the host model (e.g. removing interfaces for user hosts)
  • do not allow public ips and private subnets to be selected during user creation to suppress race conditions by multiple creations at the same time
@lightning1 lightning1 self-assigned this Jan 31, 2017
lightning1 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 31, 2017
@lightning1
WIP: change model to support centralized NAT in #73
f793654 
* rename multiple classes
* remove Host class
* remove Interface classes except SwitchInterface
* replace UserHost with a new class HostReservation
* use CIDR datatype to handle ips and networks
* rename Switch to NAS
* remove owner of Switches
lightning1 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 31, 2017
@lightning1
WIP: change model to support centralized NAT in #73
c0e6492 
- add Forwardings
- overhaul data types
- move owner from PublicIP to Translation
@lukasjuhrich
Copy link
Collaborator

@lightning1 I see you added a forwarding relation, which reminds me vaguely of what we talked about – Could you perhaps outline what the Idea for the current NAT model is?
Also, it is unclear to me what the technical requirements are – what programs (e.g. the NAT boxes) have to have access to what information (e.g. view on this pg database)?

@ibot3
Copy link
Member

ibot3 commented Mar 26, 2019

@sebschrader made a database schema for this. @lukasjuhrich did you take a look at the new schema yet?

@ibot3 ibot3 pinned this issue Mar 26, 2019
@lukasjuhrich lukasjuhrich added the 🔨 db-schema Things that touch the DB schema and probably require a migration. label Aug 31, 2019
@lukasjuhrich lukasjuhrich mentioned this issue Aug 31, 2019
Open
5 tasks
@lukasjuhrich lukasjuhrich added topic:nat meta-issue and removed 🔨 db-schema Things that touch the DB schema and probably require a migration. labels Aug 31, 2019
@lukasjuhrich lukasjuhrich mentioned this issue Aug 31, 2019
Open
2 tasks
@lukasjuhrich lukasjuhrich mentioned this issue Oct 4, 2019
Open
5 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@lightning1 lightning1

Labels
feature help wanted meta-issue prio:high topic:nat
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@lightning1 @ibot3 @lukasjuhrich