On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 01:17:48PM EDT, Jay Pipes wrote: > But, there's the rub. Neutron *isn't* attractive to this set of people > because: > > a) It doesn't provide for automatic (sub)net allocation for a user or > tenant in the same way that nova-network just Gets This Done for a user > that wants to launch an instance. As I think Kevin Fox mentioned, a > cloud admin should be able to easily set up a bunch of networks usable > by tenants, and Nova should be able to ask Neutron to just do the > needful and wire up a subnet for use by the instance without the user > needing to create a subnet, a router object, or wiring up the > connectivity themselves. I complained about this very problem (of not > having automated subnet and IP assignments) nearly *two years ago*: > > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-July/011981.html > > and was told by Neutron core team members that they weren't really > interested in changing Neutron to be more like Nova's network > auto-service behaviours. I can't speak for others, but I think the subnet allocation API is a first step towards fixing that[1]. On the IPv6 side - I am adamant[2] that it should not require complex operations since protocols like Prefix Delegation should make provisioning networking dead simple to the user - similar to how Comcast deploys IPv6 for residential customers - just "plug in". This will be a big part of my speaking session with Carl[3]. [1]: http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/kilo/subnet-allocation.html [2]: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/059329.html [3]: https://openstacksummitmay2015vancouver.sched.org/event/085f7141a451efc531430dc15d886bb2#.VQyLY0aMVE5 -- Sean M. Collins