Just to be clear from my point of view. I concur that is important and I'm not suggesting OVN parity related items as a solution. I suspect they might not be entirely aware of aspects, and I believe context setting upfront level sets the discussion. That may spawn to some other threads they may want to pull on, which in my book is a good outcome.

-Julia

On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 4:05 PM Jay Faulkner <jay@gr-oss.io> wrote:

To be clear; I'm all on board for new options and ways we can improve to avoid DHCP or needing a separate DHCP agent; but I also think it's important to have a better plugin for the existing model -- I suspect there are lots of people with installed clouds who would prefer a less impactful option than e.g. having to rework their neutron to use OVN.

-Jay

On 9/18/24 3:51 PM, Julia Kreger wrote:

I think that is a great idea!

I'd love to see $something which is not dnsmasq as an "agent" option.

I also think we need to have a mindful discussion of how we're using dhcp and the direction we see that heading in, in order to set context. I also suspect a context review could result in some action items for OVN contributors.

-Julia

On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 11:41 AM Jay Faulkner <jay@gr-oss.io> wrote:

HI all,

Myself and CID from the GR-OSS team are planning on, community willing, adding a new, more reliable DHCP backend to both Ironic and Neutron. Right now, that looks like kea, but we are less concerned about the specific project as much as we are about it not being dnsmasq ( https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2026757 ).

Given neither of us are incredibly familiar with the Neutron codebase, we wanted to get buy in and some general implementation advice.

As a note; if desired this can happen outside PTG, but this DHCP conversation is a PTG topic for Ironic so I thought this would be a good place to do it.

--

Jay Faulkner