[openstack-dev] [kolla] [bifrost] bifrost container.
Devananda van der Veen
devananda.vdv at gmail.com
Mon May 9 21:54:17 UTC 2016
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov> wrote:
> I was under the impression bifrost was 2 things, one, an
> installer/configurator of ironic in a stand alone mode, and two, a
> management tool for getting machines deployed without needing nova using
"Bifrost is a set of ansible playbooks..."
It's not "an installer" + "a management tool" -- Bifrost contains a
playbook for installing Ironic (and a whole lot of service dependencies,
configuration files, etc), and it contains a playbook for deploying a
machine image to some hardware, by leveraging Ironic (and all the other
service dependencies) that were prepared earlier. It also contains a lot of
other playbooks as well, many of which are actually sub-components of these
two high-level steps. In describing Bifrost, we have found it useful to
think of these as separate steps, but not separate things.
> The first use case seems like it should just be handled by enhancing
> kolla's ironic container stuff to directly to handle the use case, doing
> things the kolla way. This seems much cleaner to me. Doing it at runtime
> looses most of the benefits of doing it in a container at all.
You definitely shouldn't install Ironic and all of its system service
dependencies (nginx, dnsmasq, tftpd, rabbit, mysql) at runtime, but I also
don't think you should completely split things up into
> The second adds a lot of value I think, and thats what the bifrost
> container should be?
The "management tool" you refer to would be more accurately described as
"using the bifrost-dynamic-deploy playbook, which leverages the system
produced by the bifrost-ironic-install playbook, to deploy a machine image
to some hardware, which was previously enrolled in Ironic using the
Hope that is helpful,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev