[openstack-dev] [ironic] inclusion of openstack/networking-generic-switch project under OpenStack baremetal program

Pavlo Shchelokovskyy pshchelokovskyy at mirantis.com
Tue Nov 14 16:16:00 UTC 2017

Hi all,

as this topic it was recently brought up in ironic IRC meeting, I'd like to
start a discussion on the subject.

A quick recap - networking-generic-switch project (n-g-s) was born out of
necessity to do two things:

-  test the "network isolation for baremetal nodes" (a.k.a. multi-tenancy)
feature of ironic on upstream gates in virtualized environment and
- do the same on cheap/simple/dumb hardware switches that are not supported
by other various openstack/networking-* projects.

Back when it was created AFAIR neutron governance (neutron stadium) was
under some changes, so in the end n-g-s ended up not belonging to any
official program.

Over time n-g-s grew to be an essential part of ironic gate testing
(similar to virtualbmc). What's more, we have reports that it is already
being used in production.

Currently the core reviewers team of n-g-s consists of 4 people (2 of those
are currently core reviewers in ironic too), all of them are working for
the same company (Mirantis). This poses some risk as companies and people
come and go, plus since some voting ironic gate jobs depend on n-g-s
stability, a more diverse group of core reviewers from baremetal program
might be beneficial to be able to land patches in case of severe gate

Currently I know of 3 proposed ways to change the current situation:

1) include n-g-s under ironic (OpenStack Baremetal program) governance,
effectively including ironic-core team to the core team of  n-g-s similar
to how ironic-inspector currently governed (keeping an extended sub-core
team). Reasoning for addition is the same as with virtualbmc/sushy
projects, with the debatable difference that the actual scope of n-g-s is
quite bigger and apparently includes production use-cases;

2) keep things as they are now, just add ironic-stable-maint team to the
n-g-s core reviewers to decrease low diversity risks;

3) merge the code from n-g-s into networking-baremetal project which is
already under ironic governance.

As a core in n-g-s myself I'm happy with either 1) or 2), but not really
fond of 3) as it kind of stretches the networking-baremetal scope too much

Eager to hear your comments and proposals.

Dr. Pavlo Shchelokovskyy
Senior Software Engineer
Mirantis Inc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20171114/bd733e06/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list