Hi, Here are the key points from "The Future of VPN as a Service" session: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/boston-vpnaas We had a good showing of operators that have VPNaaS deployed who are relatively happy with it and definitely want to see it continue being developed. We have a list of 9 people who have volunteered to help keep the repo maintained, which should be plenty to at least keep it from bit rotting. The assessment is in process upstream to make it part of the stadium again ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/452032/) and it looks like we have the community to back it. Here are a few pain points using VPNaaS: - Better error details need to be reported back to user (e.g. which IPsec phase failed). Currently this requires a support call to the operator.[1] - VPN code should load in the existing L3 agent using some kind of extension framework so there doesn't need to be a separate subclass for VPNaaS with its own binary.[2] - IPv6 support needs to be covered with tests [3] - Improved documentation [4]: - installation (maybe an entry in the networking guide) - behavior in L3 HA failover scenarios - several useful documentation links from user's perspective available in etherpad 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1692126 2. https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1692128 3. https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1692130 4. https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1692131 Cheers, Kevin Benton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170519/05043c87/attachment.html>