Open Stack

On 15/07/15 14:31, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> On 07/15/2015 08:10 AM, Tom Fifield wrote:
>> As previously mentioned, that thread did not reach a conclusion on
>> deprecation/deletion of nova network, or provide a justification to
>> remove it from the install guide. Individuals made comments that both
>> supported and did not support it, but neither the TC nor the nova team
>> has yet reached a conclusion.
>>
>> We have and continue to recommend neutron.
>>
>> For those significant number of folks who do wish to use nova-net, we
>> must continue to support them until such time as there is a conclusion
>> on the deprecation/deletion status.
>>
>> Retaining nova-net instructions in the install guide is damn simple, and
>> achieves this aim.
>>
>> I still don't think my question has received an answer, because:
>> * the change to the starter kit does not justify it
>> * it's not because of the purpose of the install guide
> 
> And here I disagree. The Install Guide shows a single path through the
> djungle, not different options. That we diverged here in the past and
> documented two ways was an exception. Since we have now the Networking
> Guide that documents nova-network installation as well, we can remove
> this from the Install Guide and streamline the Install Guide.

Actually, the install guide has a series of optional "add-ons" at the
end ;) Historical note: originally, neutron was an add-on, but it was
just easier to talk about networking together, so we made the "choice"
based approach to deal with that.

I think that since 4b is a lot closer to nova-net than the previous
neutron attempt, what we could do on the streamlining front is seeing if
we can flatten the architectures into one in the first section. At least
the nodes and interfaces should be the same.

The differences in "basic environment" should similarly go away, because
most of that is about the tunnels and extra interfaces.

If that's doable, that would leave us streamlined up to section 6, while
enabling us to keep nova-net around for the significant number of folks
who want it.




> Andreas
> 
>> So, why is it, really?
> 
> 
>