[openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] nova-network in Icehouse and beyond

Andrew Laski andrew.laski at rackspace.com
Thu Jan 30 14:59:12 UTC 2014

On 01/30/14 at 09:31am, Russell Bryant wrote:
>On 01/30/2014 09:13 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com
>>     I can't say in any sort of confidence that I think nova-network will go
>>     away in the foreseeable future.  Yes, this has an unfortunate big impact
>>     on our original plan for the v3 API.  :-(
>>     However, I'm also not sure about the status of v3 in Icehouse, anyway.
>>     One of the key things I want to see in before we freeze the API is the
>>     tasks work.  AFAIK, there hasn't been any design review on this, much
>>     less code review.  It seems incredibly unlikely that it will be done for
>>     Icehouse at this point.  Andrew, thoughts?
>> I don't think the lack the tasks api being merged should stop us from
>> releasing the V3 API (it perhaps means there is one less significant
>> reason for people to move from the V2 API). Releasing the v3 API doesn't
>> stop us from adding tasks at a later stage to the V3 API as it could be
>> a simple additional way to interact and in practice I'd imagine there
>> will be gradual increase in support of doing things in a tasks oriented
>> way rather than a big bang everything now uses tasks approach.
>> And the sooner we can release the V3 API, the sooner we can put the V2
>> API into maintenance mode and avoid the overhead of having every new
>> feature having to be written for both.
>Well, it depends.
>If the tasks API is going to purely be an add-on, then sure, I agree.
>If it's a fundamental shift to the existing API, including changing how
>we respond to things like creating a server, then I think it has to wait.
>We really need to have some rough design agreed upon to make this call
>effectively.  In the absence of that, I think the right thing to do is
>to proceed with v3 as it stands, which will put some limitations on how
>drastic the tasks addition can be.

I just recently had a chance to put some serious effort into this and 
should have something together for discussion and design soon.  It's 
unfortunate that it's happening this late though.

Based on what I've done so far, the main change from what the APIs are 
doing now is a new Location header and a task object in the response for 
POST requests.  For a server create this is a bigger change than server 
actions because the task would replace the server in the response.

If necessary the tasks work could be done solely as an extension, but I 
would really prefer to avoid that so I'll get this ball rolling quickly.

>Russell Bryant
>OpenStack-dev mailing list
>OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list