Open Stack

Added openstack-dev, where I believe this conversation must live.

I totally agree on this, thank you for bringing up this conversation. This is not something we want to do for QoS this cycle, but probably next cycle.

Anyway, an unified data model and API to create/update classifiers will not only be beneficial from the code duplication point of view, but will also provide a better user experience.

I’m all for it.

Best regards,
Miguel Ángel Ajo



On Friday 5 June 2015 at 09:57, Vikram Choudhary wrote:

> Dear All,
>   
> There are multiple proposal floating around flow classifier rules for Liberty [1], [2] and [3].
> I feel we all should work together and try to address all our use case having a unified framework rather than working separately achieving the same  goal.
>   
> Moreover, I can find the proposal for flow classifier as defined by the existing SFC [2] proposal is too generic and could address all the use cases by minor extension’s.
>   
> In this regard, I would like all to come forward, exchange their thoughts, work together and make it happen good the first go rather doing the same effort separately and end up in duplicating code & effort L.
> I always feel less code will make our life happy in the long run ;)
>   
> Please let me know about your views.
>   
> [1] Add Neutron API extensions for packet forwarding
>       https://review.openstack.org/#/c/186663/
>   
> [2] Neutron API for Service Chaining [Flow Filter resource]
>       https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177946/6/specs/liberty/neutron-api-for-service-chaining.rst
>   
> [3] QoS API Extension [Defines classifier rule in QoSRule. Classifier rule can really grow big in the long run]:
>       https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88599/10/specs/liberty/qos-api-extension.rst
>   
> Thanks
> Vikram
>  
>  
>  
>  


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150605/217251b7/attachment.html>