Open Stack

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Elzur, Uri <uri.elzur at intel.com> wrote:
> Armando
>
>
>
> I’m asking for a clear answer “I think the position here is as follows: if a
> technology is not mainstream, i.e. readily available via distros and the
> various channels, it can only be integrated via an experimental path”
>
>
>
> If we can allow for the EXPERIMENTAL path for NSH, then we can stand up the
> whole stack in EXPERIMENTAL mode and quickly move to mainstream when other
> pieces outside of Neutron fall in place.
>
>
>
> As to OVN – it has to be EXPERIMENTAL too. I guess, if I interpret your
> response correctly, that unlike their future intention for OVN,  OvS is not
> willing to signal interest in integrating NSH
>
Would this be a better thing to discuss on the ovs-dev list [1] rather
than the openstack-dev list? I'm sure the OVS devs would be happy to
continue a discussion about the possibility of using VXLAN+NSH over
GENEVE there.

[1] http://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

>
>
> Thx
>
>
>
> Uri (“Oo-Ree”)
>
> C: 949-378-7568
>
>
>
> From: Armando M. [mailto:armamig at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 9:33 AM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 24 May 2016 at 21:53, Elzur, Uri <uri.elzur at intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Tim
>
> Sorry for the delay due to travel...
>
> This note is very helpful!
>
> We are in agreement that the team including the individuals cited below are
> supportive. We also agree that SFC belongs in the networking-SFC project
> (with proper API adjustment)
>
> It seems networking-sfc still holds the position that without OvS accepting
> VXLAN-gpe and NSH patches they can't support NSH. I'm trying to get a clear
> read on where is this stated as requirement
>
>
>
> I think the position here is as follows: if a technology is not mainstream,
> i.e. readily available via distros and the various channels, it can only be
> integrated via an experimental path. No-one is preventing anyone from
> posting patches and instructions to compile kernels and kernel modules, but
> ultimately as an OpenStack project that is suppose to produce commercial and
> production grade software, we should be very sensitive in investing time and
> energy in supporting a technology that may or may not have a viable path
> towards inclusion into mainstream (Linux and OVS in this instance).
>
>
>
> One another clear example we had in the past was DPDK (that enabled fast
> path processing in Neutron with OVS) and connection tracking (that enabled
> security groups natively build on top of OVS). We, as a project have
> consistently avoided endorsing efforts until they mature and show a clear
> path forward.
>
>
>
>
> Like you, we are closely following the progress of the patches and honestly
> I have hard time seeing OpenStack supporting NSH in production even by the
> end of 2017. I think this amounts to slowing down the market...
>
> I think we need to break the logjam.
>
>
>
> We are not the ones (Neutron) you're supposed to break the logjam with. I
> think the stakeholders here go well beyond the Neutron team alone.
>
>
>
>
> I've reviewed
> (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/312199/12/specs/newton/neutron-stadium.rst,unified)
> and found nowhere a guideline suggesting that before a backend has fully
> implemented and merged upstream a technology (i.e. another project outside
> of OepnStack!), OpenStack Neutron can't make any move. ODL is working >2
> years to support NSH using patches, yet to be accepted into Linux Kernel
> (almost done) and OvS (preliminary) - as you stated. Otherwise we create a
> serialization, that gets worse and worse over time and with additional
> layers.
>
> No one suggests the such code needs to be PRODUCTION, but we need a way to
> roll out EXPERIMENTAL functions and later merge them quickly when all layers
> are ready, this creates a nice parallelism and keeps a decent pace of
> rolling out new features broadly supported elsewhere.
>
>
>
> I agree with this last statement; this is for instance what is happening
> with OVN which, in order to work with Neutron, needs patching and stay close
> to trunk etc. The technology is still maturing and the whole Neutron
> integration is in progress, but at least there's a clear signal that the it
> will eventually become mainstream. If it did not, I would bet that
> priorities would be focused elsewhere.
>
>
>
> You asked in a previous email whether Neutron wanted to kept itself hostage
> of OVS. My answer to you is NO: we have many technology stack options we can
> rely on in order to realize abstractions so long as they are open, and have
> a viable future.
>
>
>
>
> Thx
>
> Uri (“Oo-Ree”)
> C: 949-378-7568
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Rozet [mailto:trozet at redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 7:01 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>; Elzur, Uri <uri.elzur at intel.com>
> Cc: Cathy Zhang <Cathy.H.Zhang at huawei.com>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC
>
> Hi Uri,
> I originally wrote the Tacker->ODL SFC NSH piece and have been working with
> Tacker and networking-sfc team to bring it upstream into OpenStack.  Cathy,
> Stephen, Louis and the rest of the networking-sfc team have been very
> receptive to changes specific to NSH around their current API and DB model.
> The proper place for SFC to live in OpenStack is networking-sfc, while
> Tacker can do its orchestration job by rendering ETSI MANO TOSCA input like
> VNF Descriptors and VNF Forwarding Graph Descriptors.
>
> We currently have a spec in netwoking-odl to migrate my original driver for
> ODL to do IETF NSH.  That driver will be supported in networking-sfc, along
> with some changes to networking-sfc to account for NSH awareness and encap
> type (like VXLAN+GPE or Ethernet).  The OVS work to support NSH is coming
> along and patches are under review.  Yi Yang has built a private OVS version
> with these changes and we can use that for now to test with.
>
> I think it is all coming together and will take a couple more months before
> all of the pieces (Tacker, networking-sfc, networking-odl, ovs) are in
> place.  I don't think networking-sfc is holding up any progress.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim Rozet
> Red Hat SDN Team
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Uri Elzur" <uri.elzur at intel.com>
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>, "Cathy Zhang"
> <Cathy.H.Zhang at huawei.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 8:37:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC
>
>
>
> Hi Armando, Cathy, All
>
>
>
> First I apologize for the delay, returning from a week long international
> trip. (yes, I know, a lousy excuse on many accounts…)
>
>
>
> If I’m attempting to summarize all the responses, it seems like
>
> · A given abstraction in Neutron is allowed (e.g. in support of SFC),
> preferably not specific to a given technology e.g. NSH for SFC
>
> · A stadium project is not held to the same tests (but we do not have a
> “formal” model here, today) and therefore can support even a specific
> technology e.g. NSH (definitely better with abstractions to meet Neutron
> standards for future integration)
>
>
>
> However,
>
> · There still is a chicken and egg phenomenon… how can a technology become
> main stream with OPEN SOURCE support if we can’t get an OpenStack to support
> the required abstractions before the technology was adopted elsewhere??
>
> o Especially as Stadium, can we let Neutron to lead the industry, given
> broad enough community interest?
>
> · BTW, in this particular case, there originally has been a direct ODL
> access as a NSH solution (i.e. NO OpenStack option), then we got Tacker (now
> an Neutron Stadium project, if I get it right) to support SFC and NSH, but
> we are still told that networking-sfc (another Neutron Stadium project )
> can’t do the same….
>
> · Also regarding the following comment made on another message in this
> thread, “ As to OvS features, I guess the OvS ml is a better place, but
> wonder if the Neutron community wants to hold itself hostage to the pace of
> other projects who are reluctant to adopt a feature ”, what I mean is again,
> that chicken and egg situation as above. Personally, I think OpenStack
> Neutron should allow mechanisms that are of interest / value to the
> networking community at large, to “ experiment with the abstraction” as you
> stated, independent of other organizations/projects …
>
>
>
> SOOO, is the bottom line that we agree that supporting NSH explicitly in
> networking-sfc can be added now?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thx
>
>
>
> Uri (“Oo-Ree”)
>
> C: 949-378-7568
>
>
>
> From: Armando M. [mailto:armamig at gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 5:14 PM
> To: Cathy Zhang <Cathy.H.Zhang at huawei.com>
> Cc: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 13 May 2016 at 16:01, Cathy Zhang < Cathy.H.Zhang at huawei.com > wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Hi Uri,
>
>
>
> Current networking-sfc API allows the user to specify the data path SFC
> encapsulation mechanism and NSH could be one of the encapsulation options.
>
> But since OVS release has not supported the NSH yet, we have to wait until
> NSH is added into OVS and then start to support the NSH encapsulation
> mechanism in the data path.
>
>
>
>
>
> One can support NSH whichever way they see fit. NSH in OVS is not something
> Neutron can do anything about. Neutron is about defining abstractions that
> can apply to a variety of technologies and experiment with what open source
> component is available on the shelves. Anyone can take the abstraction and
> deliver whatever technology stack they want with it and we'd happily gather
> any feedback to iterate on the abstraction to address more and more use
> case.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> AFAIK, it is the position of Neutron to have any OVS related new features
> developed inside the OVS community.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Cathy
>
>
>
>
> From: Elzur, Uri [mailto: uri.elzur at intel.com ]
> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 3:02 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); Armando M
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC
>
>
>
>
> Hi Armando
>
>
>
> As an industry we are working on SFC for 3 years or so (more?). Still to
> date, we are told we can’t get Neutron or even a Stadium project e.g.
> networking-SFC to support NSH (in IETF LC phase) because OvS has not
> supported NSH. Is this an official position of Neutron that OvS is the gold
> standard to support any new feature?
>
>
>
> We have seen OvS support other overlays that are not ahead of VXLAN-gpe in
> the IETF.
>
>
>
> Thx
>
>
>
> Uri (“Oo-Ree”)
>
> C: 949-378-7568
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>