Open Stack

Hi JC,

We agree with your proposed model of a VPC resource object. Proposal you are making makes sense to us and we would like to collaborate further on this. After reading your blueprint two things come to mind.

1. VPC vision for Openstack? (Your blueprint is proposing this vision)
2. Providing AWS VPC api compatibility with current constrains of openstack structure.

The blueprint that we proposed targets #2. 
It gives a way to implement "AWS VPC api" compatible API. This helps subset of customers to migrate their workloads from AWS to openstack based clouds. In our implementation we tied VPC to project. That was easiest way to keep isolation with current structure. We agree that what you are proposing is more generic. One to way is to implement our current proposal to have one VPC to one project mapping. As your blueprint matures we will
move VPC to multiple project mapping.

We feel that instead of throwing away all the work done we can take an incremental approach.

Regards,
Rudra


On Feb 14, 2014, at 11:09 AM, Martin, JC <jch.martin at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> There is a Blueprint targeted for Icehouse-3 that is aiming to implement the AWS VPC api. I don't think that this blueprint is providing the necessary constructs to really implement a VPC, and it is not taking into account the domains, or proposed multi tenant hierarchy. In addition, I could not find a discussion about this topic leading to the approval.
> 
> For this reason, I wrote an 'umbrella' blueprint to hopefully start the discussion on how to really implement VPC, and eventually split it into multiple real blueprints for each area.
> 
> Please, provide feedback on the following document, and on the best way to move this forward.
> 
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprint-VPC
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> JC.
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
>