[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Service Type Framework implementation

Nachi Ueno nachi at ntti3.com
Mon Jul 8 23:40:14 UTC 2013

Hi Eugene

It still not make sense for me to store static configuration on the DB
just for easy implementation.
However if the service type will support creation and deletion REST
api in future, I would like to approve this patch
as a first step of it.
You answered "I think it's doable but I'd still consider current
implementation as a first step - enikanorov. "
in the googled docs. so I believe we are in the same boat now.

I wanna make it clear future work.

- Service Type REST API (for admin) will add supports
  - Ceate Service Type
  - Delete Service Type
 -  Each driver users will lazy load the library if it is not loaded.
    (may be this should be implemented on service side such as FW, LBaaS,VPN)

- Remove service type configuration from conf

Is this OK for you guys?


2013/7/8 Eugene Nikanorov <enikanorov at mirantis.com>:
> Hi neutron folks,
> There has been a discussion around this patch
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/29750/ that introduces configuration
> options and db table for storing service providers.
> The discussion is about whether we should store configuration in the db or
> not.
> The brief of discussion has been saved here:
> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1v0nLTEsFOwWeYpYjpw4qe3QHB5lLZEE_b0TmmR5b7ic/edit#slide=id.gefc32ecf_00
> Please share your thoughts on this.
> While we may continue to discuss the best approach to this, I'd like to see
> the patch to be committed first (it seems to be ready) as there are other
> features depending on it (NSX distributed router, lbaas, fwaas and vpnaas
> possibly).
> Thanks,
> Eugene.
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list