[Openstack-operators] [Openstack] Quantum vs. Nova-network in Folsom
dan at nicira.com
Wed Sep 5 17:01:41 UTC 2012
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:23 AM, andi abes <andi.abes at gmail.com> wrote:
> late to the party... but I'll dabble.
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Chris Wright <chrisw at sous-sol.org> wrote:
>> * Rob_Hirschfeld at Dell.com (Rob_Hirschfeld at Dell.com) wrote:
>>> We've been discussing using Open vSwitch as the basis for non-Quantum Nova Networking deployments in Folsom. While not Quantum, it feels like we're bringing Nova Networking a step closer to some of the core technologies that Quantum uses.
>> To what end?
> OVS provides much more robust monitoring and operational facilities
> (e.g sFlow monitoring, better switch table visibility etc).
You won't find any disagreement from me about OVS having more advanced
> It also provides a linux-bridge compatibility layer (ovs-brcompatd
> ), which should work out-of-box with the linux-bridge. As such,
> switching to using OVS rather than the linux bridge could be done
> without any code changes to nova, just deployment changes (e.g. ensure
> that ovs-brcompatd is running to intercept brctl ioctl's - ).
Using ovs-brcompatd would be possible, though some distros do not
package and run it by default and in general it is not the "preferred"
way to run things according to email on the OVS mailing list.
> For the more adventurous, there could be any number of interesting
> scenarios enabled by having access to ovs capabilities (e.g.
Tunneling is definitely a huge benefit of OVS, but you still need
someone to setup the tunnels and direct packets into them correctly.
That's is exactly what the Quantum OVS plugin does and it is
completely open source and freely available, so if people want to
experiment with OVS tunneling, using Quantum would seem like the
obvious way to do this.
Nicira, Inc: www.nicira.com
More information about the OpenStack-operators