Open Stack

I'll wait until tomorrow and then unlink the OVS sections if nothing comes
up.


On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Edgar Magana Perdomo (eperdomo) <
eperdomo at cisco.com> wrote:

>  All those instructions should be removed from the Docs.
> I will totally help to move anyone to ML2 instead of OVS or LinuxBridge.
>
>  I do support to remove the code totally.
>
>  Edgar
>
>   From: Anne Gentle <anne at openstack.org>
> Date: Thursday, April 17, 2014 at 7:56 AM
> To: Matt Kassawara <mkassawara at gmail.com>
> Cc: "openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org" <
> openstack-docs at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-docs] Poll: What should the fate of the OVS
> section of the install guide be?
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Matt Kassawara <mkassawara at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Shall I do the honors to remove it?
>>
>>
>  Let's leave the poll open overnight in case there's something we haven't
> thought of -- and log a bug "Remove OVS from Install Guides" tagged
> icehouse. Seems like the evidence is there to remove though.
>
>  Good thing we didn't have to cut a stable branch today. :)
>
>  Anne
>
>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Nick Chase <nchase at mirantis.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 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/ccda9769/attachment.html>