Open Stack

As said I am not disagreeing with you or Ravi or JC. I also agree that
Openstack VPC implementation will benefit from these proposals.
What I am saying is it is not required AWS VPC API compatibility at
this point.  Which is what our blueprint is all about. We are not
defining THE "VPC".
Let me ask you what changes in AWS API when you go to other model?
The argument is you want multiple projects in VPC. That's great. But I
don't understand how I would specify it if my code was written to use
AWS API.
The argument you want multiple external networks per VPC I don't know
how to specify using AWS API
So list goes on.

May be I am missing something. If you don't want AWS compatibility
then that's different issue all together. And should be discussed as
such.

Regards
-Harshad


> On Feb 16, 2014, at 9:51 AM, "Allamaraju, Subbu" <subbu at subbu.org> wrote:
>
> Harshad,
>
> But the key question that Ravi brought up remains though. A project is a very small administrative container to manage policies and resources for VPCs. We've been experimenting with VPCs on OpenStack (with some mods) at work for nearly a year, and came across cases where hundreds/thousands of apps in equal number of projects needing to share resources and policies, and project to VPC mapping did not cut.
>
> I was wondering if there was prior discussion around the mapping of AWS VPC model to OpenStack concepts like projects and domains. Thanks for any pointers.
>
> Subbu
>
>> On Feb 16, 2014, at 8:01 AM, Harshad Nakil <hnakil at contrailsystems.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, [1] can be done without [2] and [3].
>> As you are well aware [2] is now merged with group policy discussions.
>> IMHO all or nothing approach will not get us anywhere.
>> By the time we line up all our ducks in row. New features/ideas/blueprints will keep Emerging.
>>
>> Regards
>> -Harshad
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 16, 2014, at 2:30 AM, Salvatore Orlando <sorlando at nicira.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It seems this work item is made of several blueprints, some of which are not yet approved. This is true at least for the Neutron blueprint regarding policy extensions.
>>>
>>> Since I first looked at this spec I've been wondering why nova has been selected as an endpoint for network operations rather than Neutron, but this probably a design/implementation details whereas JC here is looking at the general approach.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, my only point here is that is seems that features like this need an "all-or-none" approval.
>>> For instance, could the VPC feature be considered functional if blueprint [1] is implemented, but not [2] and [3]?
>>>
>>> Salvatore
>>>
>>> [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/aws-vpc-support
>>> [2] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/policy-extensions-for-neutron
>>> [3] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/hierarchical-multitenancy
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11 February 2014 21:45, Martin, JC <jch.martin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ravi,
>>>
>>> It seems that the following Blueprint
>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprint-aws-vpc-support
>>>
>>> has been approved.
>>>
>>> However, I cannot find a discussion with regard to the merit of using project vs. domain, or other mechanism for the implementation.
>>>
>>> I have an issue with this approach as it prevents tenants within the same domain sharing the same VPC to have projects.
>>>
>>> As an example, if you are a large organization on AWS, it is likely that you have a large VPC that will be shred by multiple projects. With this proposal, we loose that capability, unless I missed something.
>>>
>>> JC
>>>
>>>> On Dec 19, 2013, at 6:10 PM, Ravi Chunduru <ravivsn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>  We had some internal discussions on role of Domain and VPCs. I would like to expand and understand community thinking of Keystone domain and VPCs.
>>>>
>>>> Is VPC equivalent to Keystone Domain?
>>>>
>>>> If so, as a public cloud provider - I create a Keystone domain and give it to an organization which wants a virtual private cloud.
>>>>
>>>> Now the question is if that organization wants to have  departments wise allocation of resources it is becoming difficult to visualize with existing v3 keystone constructs.
>>>>
>>>> Currently, it looks like each department of an organization cannot have their own resource management with in the organization VPC ( LDAP based user management, network management or dedicating computes etc.,) For us, Openstack Project does not match the requirements of a department of an organization.
>>>>
>>>> I hope you guessed what we wanted - Domain must have VPCs and VPC to have projects.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to know how community see the VPC model in Openstack.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -Ravi.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev