Open Stack

Hi German,

Thanks for the initiative. I am currently working for few of the FWaaS BP's
proposed for Liberty and definitely would like to be a part of this effort.

BTW did you mean FWaaS IRC meeting to take up this discussion further?

Thanks
Vikram


On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:20 AM, Kyle Mestery <mestery at mestery.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Eichberger, German <
> german.eichberger at hp.com> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>>
>> During the FWaaS session in Vancouver [1] it became apparent that both
>> the FWaaS API and the Security Groups API are lacking in functionality and
>> the connection between the two is not well defined.
>>
>>
>> For instance if a cloud user opens up all ports in the security groups
>> they still can’t connect and might figure out days later that there is a
>> second API (FWaaS) which prevents him from connecting to his service. This
>> will probably make for a frustrating experience.
>>
>>
>> Similarly, the operators I spoke to all said that the current FWaaS
>> implementation isn’t going far enough and needs a lot of missing
>> functionality added to fulfill their requirements on a Firewall
>> implementation.
>>
>>
>> With that backdrop I am proposing to take a step back and assemble a
>> group of operators and users to collect use cases for the firewall service
>> – both FWaaS and Security Groups based. I believe it is important at this
>> juncture to really focus on the users and less on technical limitations. I
>> also think this reset is necessary to make a service which meets the needs
>> of operators and users better.
>>
>>
>> Once we have collected the use cases we can evaluate our current API’s
>> and functionality and start making the necessary improvements to turn FWaaS
>> into a service which covers most of the use cases and requirements.
>>
>>
>> Please join me in this effort. We have set up an etherpad [2] to start
>> collecting the use cases and will discuss them in an upcoming meeting.
>>
>>
> Thanks for sending this out German. I took home the same impressions that
> you did. Similar to what we did with the LBaaS project (to great success
> last summer), I think we should look at FWaaS API V2 with the new
> contributors coming on as equals and helping to define the new operator
> focused API. My suggestion is we look at doing the work to lay the
> foundation during Liberty for a successful launch of this API during the
> Mxx cycle. I'm happy to step in here and guide the new group of
> contributors similar to what we did for LBaaS.
>
> Thanks,
> Kyle
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> German
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-neutron-sg-fwaas-future-direction
>>
>> [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fwaas_use_cases
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20150528/e7750a79/attachment.html>