Open Stack

We'd originally kept it in because it didn't look like it would be
deprecated.   Now that it is I agree it should be dropped now that ML2
works.

---- Nick
On Apr 17, 2014 10:03 AM, "Matt Kassawara" <mkassawara at gmail.com> wrote:

> Also, Phil Hopkins just pointed out the Icehouse Neutron release notes to
> me.
>
>
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReleaseNotes/Icehouse#OpenStack_Network_Service_.28Neutron.29
>
> In particular...
>
> "The OVS plugin and Linux Bridge plugin are deprecated and should not be
> used for deployments. The ML2 plugin combines OVS and Linux Bridge support
> into one plugin. A migration script has been provided for Havana
> deployments looking to convert to ML2. The migration does not have a
> rollback capability, so it is recommended the migration be tested on a copy
> of the database prior to running on a live system."
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Matt Kassawara <mkassawara at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Those who responded to the earlier thread want to keep only ML2. Before
>> deciding what to do with OVS, we need to consider the following questions:
>>
>> 1) Should any new installations use OVS instead of ML2?
>> 2) Will Juno deprecate OVS?
>>
>> I don't mind updating the OVS sections and testing them on at least a
>> handful of the most common distributions, but the process will take a
>> significant amount of time and effort perhaps better spent working on more
>> relevant parts of the installation guide.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Anne Gentle <anne at openstack.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Tom Fifield <tom at openstack.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 17/04/14 13:40, Steve Gordon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>>> Poll here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.polljunkie.com/poll/jasatw/what-should-we-do-with-ovs
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have two plugins in the neutron section of the install guide: ML2
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> OpenvSwitch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of these, ML2 has been extensively reworked and tested (it's pretty).
>>>>>> OpenVswitch "may" also work, but has been deprecated for future use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote on the poll as to what should happen to the OpenvSwitch
>>>>>> section :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Where is the leave it how it is option (which I thought we had already
>>>>> reached agreement on)?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sorry - option added.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I think leaving something in that doesn't meet the quality
>>>> bar we set by testing everything else in the guide is a bad idea.
>>>> Especially when there is a good alternative, that significant time has been
>>>> put into, and is likely a better option for users long-term.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> This feels awfully late for a decision.
>>>
>>> The previous thread is here from April 3 though:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/2014-April/004204.html
>>>
>>> I sense the decision then was to ensure ML2 works, and OVS clean up
>>> could occur later. Matt, do you recall any other discussions?
>>>
>>> Anne
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tom
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Openstack-docs mailing list
>>>> Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Openstack-docs mailing list
>>> Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openstack-docs mailing list
> Openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20140417/14e66671/attachment.html>