Networking considerations

Last changed: 2021-09-17

IPv6 or dualStack

When creating an instance, you need to choose a network. There are two networks to choose from:

This network provides a public IPv6 address and a private IPv4 address. The IPv4 address can still be used for communication between instances in NREC, but is not accessible from the outside, i.e. from the internet. The instance can use its private IPv4 address to communicate with the outside, via local NAT.
This network provides a public IPv6 address and a public IPv4 address. Both are accessible from the internet.

Both network are technically dualstack, i.e. the instance will get both an IPv4 and an IPv6 address. The only difference is the IPv4 address, which for the IPv6 network will be a RFC1918 private network address.

When creating an instance, you should only choose only one network. Never choose both. While it is technically possible to choose more than one, it is unnecessary and redundant, and our images will most likely not work properly with two networks.

Which to choose


Only one network!

The instance will not work correctly if more than one network is applied. Only choose one of IPv6 or dualStack.

As explained above, the only difference between the two networks is the IPv4 address. If you need to communicate with your instance via IPv4 from the outside of NREC, you should choose dualStack. If not, you should choose IPv6.

Note that when using the IPv6 network, the instance can still communicate with the outside using its private IPv4 via NAT. However, the NAT infrastructure in NREC does not scale to vast amounts of traffic. If your instance needs to download huge amounts of data via IPv4 you should still choose dualStack to get a dedicated IPv4 link. This is not an issue for normal maintenance tasks such as apt or yum operations.

The IPv4 address space is very limited compared to IPv6. This applies both globally and to NREC. We have a limited number of IPv4 addresses, and NREC users are urged to choose the IPv6 network unless a public IPv4 address is strictly needed.

In summary:

  • If your instance needs to be reachable via IPv4 from the internet, choose dualStack
  • If your instance needs to download huge amounts of data via IPv4, choose dualStack
  • For all else, choose IPv6


If unsure, choose IPv6. Our IPv4 address space is very limited. Login hosts at UiO and UiB have IPv6 configured, and can be used to manage your instances via IPv6.


A common networking model in infrastructure clouds is virtualization of Layer 2 domains, meaning that the tenants/projects are given one or more private networks, available only for them. Then, public IP addresses are connected to virtual routers and DNATed to the target instance. For the end user, this presents great flexibility and enables them to create rather complex network designs inside the cloud. However, it also creates a great deal of complexity and overhead. In this model, all traffic is NATed, and Layer 2 domains span entire data centers and beyond, adding encapsulation cost. To achieve this, linux kernel IP namespacing is employed to isolate the tenant networks. In addition, all traffic passes through dedicated servers acting as network nodes, adding infrastructure cost. Another problem with this model is that it is very stateful, so whenever something goes wrong, there’s a lot of labor involved in fixing the system back to it’s desired state. All this complexity also comes at the price of performance.

In NREC we have chosen another, much simpler, model. This model is based on the project calico openstack neutron core plugin, which provides a pure Layer 3 model for the instance IP traffic. Our hypervisors are connected together with a higly redundant Layer 2 network utilizing the modern linux teaming driver in an active/active 802.3ad configuration (LACP) with 10gbit interconnects. Then, all hypervisors, which are running on linux, employes a BGP router (bird), BGP in short being the protocol that runs the Internet. The hypervisors are connected to hardware routers in a leaf-spine topology, the spines acting as route reflectors for the hypervisor’s routers. So, when an instance is spawned, a host route to a TAP device on the hypervisor is created locally (ip-address/32), then reflected to all routers, including those running on the other hypervisors. The instances themselves, where the TAP device appears as a network adapter, are isolated in their own Layer 2 domain, neighboring only a virtual device answering ARP requests with arbitrary MAC addresses. All security group rules are implemented on the TAP device by the networking system.

Our chosen networking model provides a host of benefits:

NREC Networking Model


Layer 2 domains are kept small, and only a single IP name space is used on each host. Therefore, all traffic is easily visible. This makes troubleshooting a lot easier, hopefully saving us a lot of headaches.

Less state

As our cloud network is mostly stateless, recovering after some sort of failure or outage should be much easier, saving still a lot of headaches for both end users and engineers.


Without the need for NAT, DNAT and dedicated servers pushing network traffic, both throughput and latency shows great performance, with each hypervisor able to push and receive traffic near line speed.


With BGP running the internet, it proves to be able to also scale in the data center while keeping our failure domains rather small


Our routers and switches are running linux on the control plane, running on commodity switch hardware, avoiding vendor lock-in or proprietary control systems. Because we configure our networking equipment the same way we configure our servers, management overhead and hardware cost is reduced.


While our chosen networking model in most cases is invisible for the end user, there are some use cases where popular and traditional methodologies won’t work. In short, every system that needs Layer 2 visibility from instance to instance will not work. While there are not many systems which need this Layer 2 connectivity, there are exceptions, the most popular these days being the deployment of container clusters. Container cluster networking itself is not trivial, but trying to deploy it on top of our networking model is a challenge. While it can be done, failover mechanisms would require a load balancer outside the IaaS infrastructure. Still, a single host deployment should be rather trivial. In short, we strongly encourage you to contact the NREC team if you run into problems caused by the networking model. Often your problems can be solved in other ways than you originally envisioned.

So, in short, for now, we don’t offer Load-balancing as a Service, or other networking features requiring host to host Layer 2 connectivity. Thus, private networking is unavailable. You must secure your instances with security groups and/or other mechanisms.