[openstack-dev] [neutron] [lbaas] [octavia] Ocata LBaaS retrospective and next steps recap
Lingxian Kong
anlin.kong at gmail.com
Tue Nov 8 10:14:02 UTC 2016
thanks very much for the update!
Cheers,
Lingxian Kong (Larry)
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Michael Johnson <johnsomor at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Ocata LBaaS retrospective and next steps recap
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This session lightly touched on the work in the newton cycle, but
> primarily focused on planning for the Ocata release and the LBaaS spin
> out of neutron and merge into the octavia project [1]. Notes were
> captured on the etherpad [1].
>
> The focus of work for Ocata in neutron-lbaas and octavia will be on
> the spin out/merge and not new features.
>
> Work has started on merging neutron-lbaas into the octavia project
> with API sorting/pagination, quota support, keystone integration,
> neutron-lbaas driver shim, and documentation updates. Work is still
> needed for policy support, the API shim to handle capability gaps
> (example: stats are by listener in octavia, but by load balancer in
> neturon-lbaas), neutron api proxy, a database migration script from
> the neutron database to the octavia database for existing non-octavia
> load balancers, and adding the "bug for bug" neutron-lbaas v2 API to
> the octavia API server.
>
> The room agreed that since we will have a shim/proxy in neutron for
> some time, updating the OpenStack client can be deferred to a future
> cycle.
>
> There is a lot of concern about Ocata being a short cycle and the
> amount of work to be done. There is hope that additional resources
> will help out with this task to allow us to complete the spin
> out/merge for Ocata.
>
> We discussed the current state of the active/active topology patches
> and agreed that it is unlikely this will merge in Ocata. There are a
> lot of open comments and work to do on the patches. It appears that
> these patches may have been created against an old release and require
> significant updating.
>
> Finally there was a question about when octavia would implement
> metadata tags. When we dug into the need for the tags we found that
> what was really wanted is a full implementation of the flavors
> framework [3] [4]. Some vendors expressed interest in finishing the
> flavors framework for Octavia.
>
> Thank you to everyone that participated in our design session and etherpad.
>
> Michael
>
> [1] https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/
> newton/kill-neutron-lbaas.html
> [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ocata-neutron-octavia-lbaas-session
> [3] https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/
> mitaka/neutron-flavor-framework-templates.html
> [4] https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/
> liberty/neutron-flavor-framework.html
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20161108/7f78bf45/attachment.html>
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list