Open Stack

loy wolfe [mailto:loywolfe at gmail.com] wrote:

>Then since Network/Subnet/Port will never be treated just as LEGACY
>COMPATIBLE role, there is no need to extend Nova-Neutron interface to
>follow the GBP resource. Anyway, one of optional service plugins inside
>Neutron shouldn't has any impact on Nova side.

This gets to the root of why I was getting confused about Jay and others
having Nova related concerns. I was/am assuming that GBP is simply an
*additional* mechanism for manipulating Neutron, not a deprecation of any
part of the existing Neutron API. I think Jay's concern and the reason
why he keeps mentioning Nova as the biggest and most important consumer
of Neutron's API stems from an assumption that Nova would need to change
to use the GBP API.

If I've understood the follow on discussions correctly, there's no need for
Nova to use the GBP API at all until/unless the Nova developers see benefit
in it because they can continue to accomplish everything with the existing
API. The GBP API simply provides a more application centric rather than
network centric representation of the same thing.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140811/7604af30/attachment.html>