Open Stack

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Dean Troyer <dtroyer at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo <
> mangelajo at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Why would operators install from devstack? that’s not going to be the
>> case.
>>
>
> If they do they need more help than we can give...
>
>
>> I believe we should have both LB & OVS well tested, if LB is a good
>> option for
>> some operators willing to migrate from nova, that’s great, let’s make
>> sure LB
>> is perfectly tested upstream.
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>> But by doing such change we can’t let OVS code rot and we would be
>> neglecting
>> a big customer base which is now making use of the openvswitch mechanism.
>> (may be I’m miss understanding  the scope of the change).
>>
>
> Changing DevStack's default doesn't remove anything OVS-related, nor does
> it by itself remove any OVS jobs.  It gives everyone who is happy with
> nova-net (or more correctly doesn't think about it) a new default that
> changes their experience the least for when nova-net disappears.
>
> I think you summed it up quite eloquently Dean. And this is why we'll do
our best to revive the LB support in Neutron during Liberty.

Thanks,
Kyle


> dt
>
> --
>
> Dean Troyer
> dtroyer at gmail.com
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150414/4ab7054d/attachment.html>