---
title: Frequently Asked Questions
canonical_url: '/usage/troubleshooting/faq'
---

This page contains answers to several frequently asked technical
questions about Calico on Openstack. It is updated on a regular basis: 
please check back for more information.

## "Why use Calico?"

The problem Calico tries to solve is the networking of workloads (VMs,
containers, etc) in a high scale environment. Existing L2 based methods
for solving this problem have problems at high scale. Compared to these,
we think Calico is more scalable, simpler and more flexible. We think
you should look into it if you have more than a handful of nodes on a
single site.

For a more detailed discussion of this topic, see our blog post at 
[Why Calico?](https://www.projectcalico.org/why-calico/).

## "Does Calico work with IPv6?"

Yes! Calico's core components support IPv6 out-of-the box. However,
not all orchestrators that we integrate with support IPv6 yet.

## "Why does my container have a route to 169.254.1.1?"

In a Calico network, each host acts as a gateway router for the 
workloads that it hosts.  In container deployments, Calico uses 
169.254.1.1 as the address for the Calico router.  By using a 
link-local address, Calico saves precious IP addresses and avoids 
burdening the user with configuring a suitable address.

While the routing table may look a little odd to someone who is used to 
configuring  LAN networking, using explicit routes rather than 
subnet-local gateways is fairly common in WAN networking.

## Why can't I see the 169.254.1.1 address mentioned above on my host?

Calico tries hard to avoid interfering with any other configuration
on the host.  Rather than adding the gateway address to the host side
of each workload interface, Calico sets the `proxy_arp` flag on the 
interface.  This makes the host behave like a gateway, responding to
ARPs for 169.254.1.1 without having to actually allocate the IP address 
to the interface.

## I've heard Calico uses proxy ARP, doesn't proxy ARP cause a lot of problems?

It can, but not in the way that Calico uses it.

In container deployments, Calico only uses proxy ARP for resolving the 
169.254.1.1 address.  The routing table inside the container ensures
that all traffic goes via the 169.254.1.1 gateway so that is the only
IP that will be ARPed by the container.

## "Is Calico compliant with PCI/DSS requirements?"

PCI certification applies to the whole end-to-end system, of which
Calico would be a part. We understand that most current solutions use
VLANs, but after studying the PCI requirements documents, we believe
that Calico does meet those requirements and that nothing in the
documents *mandates* the use of VLANs.

## "How does Calico maintain saved state?"

State is saved in a few places in a Calico deployment, depending on
whether it's global or local state.

Local state is state that belongs on a single compute host, associated
with a single running Felix instance (things like kernel routes, tap
devices etc.). Local state is entirely stored by the Linux kernel on the
host, with Felix storing it only as a temporary mirror. This makes Felix
effectively stateless, with the kernel acting as a backing data store on
one side and etcd as a data source on the other.

If Felix is restarted, it learns current local state by interrogating
the kernel at start up. It then reads from `etcd` all the local state
which it should have, and updates the kernel to match. This approach has
strong resiliency benefits, in that if Felix restarts you don't suddenly
lose access to your VMs or containers. As long as the Linux kernel is
running, you've still got full functionality.

The bulk of global state is mastered in whatever component hosts the
plugin.

-   In the case of OpenStack, this means a Neutron database. Our
    OpenStack plugin (more strictly a Neutron ML2 driver) queries the
    Neutron database to find out state about the entire deployment. That
    state is then reflected to `etcd` and so to Felix.
-   In certain cases, `etcd` itself contains the master copy of
    the data. This is because some Docker deployments have an `etcd`
    cluster that has the required resiliency characteristics, used to
    store all system configuration -and so `etcd` is configured so as to
    be a suitable store for critical data.
-   In other orchestration systems, it may be stored in distributed
    databases, either owned directly by the plugin or by the
    orchestrator itself.

The only other state storage in a Calico network is in the BGP sessions,
which approximate a distributed database of routes. This BGP state is
simply a replicated copy of the per-host routes configured by Felix
based on the global state provided by the orchestrator.

This makes the Calico design very simple, because we store very little
state. All of our components can be shutdown and restarted without risk,
because they resynchronize state as necessary. This makes modelling
their behaviour extremely simple, reducing the complexity of bugs.

## "I heard Calico is suggesting layer 2: I thought you were layer 3! What's happening?"

It's important to distinguish what Calico provides to the workloads
hosted in a data center (a purely layer 3 network) with what the Calico
project *recommends* operators use to build their underlying network
fabric.

Calico's core principle is that *applications* and *workloads*
overwhelmingly need only IP connectivity to communicate. For this reason
we build an IP-forwarded network to connect the tenant applications and
workloads to each other, and the broader world.

However, the underlying physical fabric obviously needs to be set up
too. Here, Calico has discussed how both a layer 2 (see
[here]({{site.baseurl}}/{{page.version}}/reference/private-cloud/l2-interconnect-fabric)) 
or a layer 3 (see 
[here]({{site.baseurl}}/{{page.version}}/reference/private-cloud/l3-interconnect-fabric)) 
fabric
could be integrated with Calico. This is one of the great strengths of
the Calico model: it allows the infrastructure to be decoupled from what
we show to the tenant applications and workloads.

We have some thoughts on different interconnect approaches (as noted
above), but just because we say that there are layer 2 and layer 3 ways
of building the fabric, and that those decisions may have an impact on
route scale, does not mean that Calico is "going back to Ethernet" or
that we're recommending layer 2 for tenant applications. In all cases we
forward on IP packets, no matter what architecture is used to build the
fabric.

## "I need to use hard-coded private IP addresses: how do I do that?"

While this isn't supported today, this is on our roadmap using a
stateless variant of RFC 6877 (464-XLAT). For more detail, see
[this document]({{site.baseurl}}/{{page.version}}/reference/advanced/overlap-ips).

## "How do I control policy/connectivity without virtual/physical firewalls?"

Calico provides an extremely rich security policy model, detailed 
[here]({{site.baseurl}}/{{page.version}}/reference/security-model). 
This model applies the policy at the first and last hop
of the routed traffic within the Calico network (the source and
destination compute hosts).

This model is substantially more robust to failure than a centralised
firewall-based model. In particular, the Calico approach has no
single-point-of-failure: if the device enforcing the firewall has failed
then so has one of the workloads involved in the traffic (because the
firewall is enforced by the compute host).

This model is also extremely amenable to scaling out. Because we have a
central repository of policy configuration, but apply it at the edges of
the network (the hosts) where it is needed, we automatically ensure that
the rules match the topology of the data center. This allows easy
scaling out, and gives us all the advantages of a single firewall (one
place to manage the rules), but none of the disadvantages (single points
of failure, state sharing, hairpinning of traffic, etc.).

Lastly, we decouple the reachability of nodes and the policy applied to
them. We use BGP to distribute the topology of the network, telling
every node how to get to every endpoint in case two endpoints need to
communicate. We use policy to decide *if* those two nodes should
communicate, and if so, how. If policy changes and two endpoints should
now communicate, where before they shouldn’t have, all we have to do is
update policy: the reachability information does not change. If later
they should be denied the ability to communicate, the policy is updated
again, and again the reachability doesn’t have to change.

## "How does Calico interact with the Neutron API?"

[This document]({{site.baseurl}}/{{page.version}}/reference/advanced/calico-neutron-api) 
document goes into extensive detail about how
various Neutron API calls translate into Calico actions.
