Open Stack

And since we've circled back I might add that perhaps we want nova-network
to deliver that.
Simple, reliable networking leveraging well-established off-the-shelf
technologies that satisfies the use cases Jeremy is referring to.

If regardless of changes in governance pertaining openstack project the
consensus is still that nova-network functionalities should be performed by
neutron under the same assumptions, then what Kevin is suggesting goes in
the right direction, regardless of whether the deployer chooses linux
bridge, OVS, or some fancy advanced technology like [1]. However, there's
more than that. For instance ask the average user that "just wants
connectivity" whether they think creating a router or pointing a floating
ip to a port should be part of their workflow. You can figure out the
answer by yourself.

I had a chat with Sean Dague a few day back on IRC [2]. The point seems
that when neutron is deployed as a replacement for nova-network it should
provide defaults that provide a replacement for nova-network flatdhcp
networking mode. For instance this would be a shared network, a single
router, and a single external network (the floating IP pool).

If multi-host is required that single router should be distributed (and
perhaps one day neutron will distribute SNAT too). Router distribution with
linux bridge might be a problem with the current framework, where we're
insisting on supporting nova-network scenario using neutron's control plane
constructs which have been conceived for multi-tenancy and self service
networking.

And then there's the API usability perspective. But if we provide default
for neutron resources then the problem is probably solved as users will
have little to no  interaction with the neutron API.

Salvatore


[1] https://github.com/salv-orlando/hdn
[2]
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-neutron/%23openstack-neutron.2015-04-15.log
from 2015-04-15T13:26:55

On 17 April 2015 at 17:22, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:

> On 2015-04-16 21:17:03 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote:
> > What do you disagree with? I was pointing out that using Linux
> > bridge will not reduce the complexity of the model of self-service
> > networking, which is what the quote was complaining about.
>
> On the contrary, if you reread the message to which you were
> previously replying, it's was about the unnecessary complexity of
> OVS (and Neutron in general) for deployments which explicitly
> _don't_ need and can never take advantage of self-service
> networking. The implication being that Neutron needs a "just connect
> everything to a simple flat network on a bridge I can easily debug"
> mode which hides or eliminates those complexities instead.
> --
> Jeremy Stanley
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20150417/5570fbd8/attachment.html>