Open Stack

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 01:19:13PM -0700, Edgar Magana wrote:
> Hello Folks,
> 
> Thank you Zane, Steven and Clint for you input.
> 
> Our main goal in this BP is to provide networking users such as Heat (we
> consider it as a neutron user) a better and consolidated network building
> block in terms of an API that you could use for orchestration of
> application-driven requirements. This building block does not add any
> "intelligence" to the network topology because it does not have it and
> this is why I think this BP is different from the work that you are doing
> in Heat.

So how do you propose to handle dependencies between elements in the
topology, e.g where things need to be created/deleted in a particular
order, or where one resource must be in a particular state before another
can be created?

> The network topologies BP is not related to the Neutron Network Service
> Insertion BP:
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/neutron-services-insertion-c
> haining-steering

So I wasn't saying they were related, only that they both, arguably, may
have some scope overlap with what Heat is doing.

> I do agree with Steven that the insertion work add "intelligence"
> (explicit management of dependencies, state and workflow) to the network
> orchestration simply because user will need to know the insertion
> mechanism and dependencies between Network Advances Services, that work is
> more into Heat space that the BP that I am proposing but that is just my
> opinion.

This seems a good reason to leverage the work we're doing rather than
reinventing it.  I'm not arguing that Heat should necessarily be the
primary interface to such functionality, only that Heat could (and possibly
should) be used to do the orchestration aspects.

> However, is there a session where I can discuss this BP with you guys?,
> the session that I proposed in Neutron has been rejected because it was
> considered by the PTL as an overlapping work with the Heat goals,
> therefore I wanted to know if you can to discuss it or I just simple go
> ahead and start the implementation. I do still believe it can be easily
> implemented in Neutron and then exposed to Heat but I am really looking
> forward to having a broader discussion.

I don't think we have any sessions directly related to Neutron, but we are
definitely interested in discussing this (and other Neutron BPs which may
have integration points requiring orchestration).

I suggest we have an informal breakout session with those interested on
Tuesday or Wednesday, or it could be a topic which Steve Baker may consider
for this placeholder session:

http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/360

Steve