[openstack-dev] [Ironic] Baremetal Storage Service?
akirayoshiyama at gmail.com
Thu Nov 17 12:04:04 UTC 2016
Thank you for your replies.
2016-11-16 11:38 GMT+09:00 Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com>:
> On 11/14/2016 10:22 PM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote:
>> 2016-11-14 2:19 GMT+09:00 Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com
>> <mailto:jaypipes at gmail.com>>:
>>> On 11/13/2016 01:52 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote:
>>>> No. "physical storages" means storage products like EMC VNX, NetApp
>>>> Data ONTAP, HPE Lefthand and so on.
>>>> Say there is a new service named X to manage them. A user, he/she will
>>>> be a new IaaS admin, requests many baremetal servers to Ironic and
>>>> some baremetal storages to X. After they are provided, he/she will
>>>> start to build a new OpenStack deployment with them. Nova in the new
>>>> one will provide VMs on the servers and Cinder will manage logical
>>>> volumes on the storages. X doesn't manage each logical volume but
>>>> pools, user accounts and network connections of the storages.
>>> Yeah, I personally believe that is the domain of configuration management
>>> systems not OpenStack HTTP API services. What you are describing is not a
>>> multi-tenant HTTP API service, it's an IT/storage admin automation tool.
>>> Incidentally, Ironic isn't multi-tenant either. It lives in the weird
>>> in OpenStack of being an HTTP API service that isn't meant for "normal
>>> users" so in order to provider a cloud service (BareMetal-as-a-Service),
>>> Ironic *requires* Nova to provide the multi-tenancy aspects of the
>>> "as-a-Service" part of the software.
>> Hmm... so, if I built a (multi-tenant) baremetal IaaS service like
>> with OpenStack Newton release, tenant users can deploy an OpenStack
>> environment with cinder using SDS on it. No physical storages.
> I think what you're trying to describe is that you want to build a cloud
> reseller platform where the reseller tenants would be able to provision raw
> storage for an OpenStack deployment that is then resold to end-users as a
> hosted cloud service.
> Is that correct?
Yes, it is. Sorry for my few description.
> If so, yeah, there really isn't anything like that in the OpenStack
> ecosystem, and frankly, I think it would be a tough sell to have that in
> OpenStack because it is so very deployer and vendor-specific. Essentially
> you want to allow reseller tenants to make SAN hardware management calls via
> an API that is exposed through the normal OpenStack HTTP APIs. And I don't
> think that is something that is all that abstractable :(
Hmm... it looks better that:
a) cinder in the "undercloud" OpenStack deployment provides big
volumes for "overcloud" OpenStack deployments.
b) cinder in an overcloud provides volumes from them with LVM/iSCSI driver.
>>> Ironic is great, of course, but it ain't a cloud service without help
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
吉山あきら <akirayoshiyama at gmail.com>
More information about the OpenStack-dev