Open Stack

* Balaji.P at freescale.com (Balaji.P at freescale.com) wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mestery at noironetworks.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:19 AM
> > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][NFV] NFV BoF at design summit
> > 
> > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Ian Wells <ijw.ubuntu at cack.org.uk>
> > wrote:
> > > I think the Service VM discussion resolved itself in a way that
> > > reduces the problem to a form of NFV - there are standing issues using
> > > VMs for services, orchestration is probably not a responsibility that
> > > lies in Neutron, and as such the importance is in identifying the
> > > problems with the plumbing features of Neutron that cause
> > > implementation difficulties.  The end result will be that VMs
> > > implementing tenant services and implementing NFV should be much the
> > > same, with the addition of offering a multitenant interface to
> > Openstack users on the tenant service VM case.
> > >
> > > Geoff Arnold is dealing with the collating of information from people
> > > that have made the attempt to implement service VMs.  The problem
> > > areas should fall out of his effort.  I also suspect that the key
> > > points of NFV that cause problems (for instance, dealing with VLANs
> > > and trunking) will actually appear quite high up the service VM list as
> > well.
> > > --
> > There is a weekly meeting for the Service VM project [1], I hope some
> > representatives from the NFB sub-project can make it to this meeting and
> > participate there.
> [P Balaji-B37839] I agree with Kyle, so that we will have enough synch between Service VM and NFV goals.

Makes good sense.  Will make sure to get someone there.

thanks,
-chris