[Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at the next summit
Sriram Subramanian
sriram at sriramhere.com
Sat Dec 21 15:46:25 UTC 2013
+1 on Tim's idea.
I would like to expand the focus from operations to workloads
- what kind of workloads users have success running on OpenStack?
- what kind of workloads with lesser success?
And of course would be happy to share my experience.
Thanks,
-Sriram
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Matthew Ray <matthewhray at gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps we could try to co-locate a future Operators mini-summit with
> FOSDEM or SCALE (February) and/or OSCON (July)? Events like those are
> conveniently scheduled between November and April and likely to already
> have OpenStack-related developers/deployers planning on attending. The
> logistics might not work for February, but we should start planning for the
> future.
>
> Thanks,
> Matt Ray
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Matthew Ray <matthewhray at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Yes please, the sooner something can be planned the better. The gap
>> between development and operations is growing bigger every release.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Tim Bell <Tim.Bell at cern.ch> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> How about we do a mid-summit user/operator boot camp (like the programs
>>> do, i.e. February or so) where:
>>>
>>> - we get some operators and users (i.e. those that run and those that
>>> consume) OpenStack together
>>> - we describe our pain points (as Tom would say
>>> curse/desk-slam/white-board)
>>> - we prepare a set of blueprints and corresponding representatives to
>>> explain them to the development community
>>> - we identify cross-project issues and take them to the TC
>>>
>>> My experience is that there is significant overlap between us all so it
>>> is not necessary to have everyone there, especially if we solicit input
>>> before through the ambassadors etc.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> On 20 Dec 2013, at 07:55, Tristan Goode <tristan at aptira.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > I guess the simplest meaning is "all those that are not committing
>>> code to
>>> > the OpenStack code base"? :D
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>> >> From: Everett Toews [mailto:everett.toews at RACKSPACE.COM]
>>> >> Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2013 1:54 AM
>>> >> To: Tristan Goode
>>> >> Cc: Tom Fifield; <openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>> >> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users at
>>> > the next
>>> >> summit
>>> >>
>>> >> Hi Tristan,
>>> >>
>>> >> Can you clarify what you meant by Users in your subject line?
>>> >>
>>> >> I took it to mean application developers (i.e. the developers writing
>>> > applications on
>>> >> top of OpenStack) and possibly application operators (i.e. the
>>> operators
>>> > deploying
>>> >> applications on top of OpenStack). They seem to have gotten lost in
>>> the
>>> > discussion
>>> >> here.
>>> >>
>>> >> Ultimately, OpenStack is being built for them. As I believe was your
>>> > original intent,
>>> >> they need a voice in such a forum too. I realize that even less
>>> > application developers
>>> >> are likely to attend the summit than operators.
>>> >>
>>> >> However we still need to encourage their involvement and make a place
>>> > for them.
>>> >> We also need to encourage operators to gather feedback from their
>>> > application
>>> >> developers about their experiences developer on top of OpenStack as
>>> I'm
>>> > sure the
>>> >> operations folk get an occasional ear full from them. ;)
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> Everett
>>> >>
>>> >> P.S. Just to be clear...because we have a lot of overlapping
>>> > terminology.
>>> >>
>>> >> application developers = the developers writing applications on top of
>>> > OpenStack
>>> >> application operators = the operators deploying applications on top of
>>> > OpenStack
>>> >> [OpenStack] developers = the developers writing OpenStack [OpenStack]
>>> > operators
>>> >> = the developers deploying OpenStack
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Dec 17, 2013, at 3:24 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Perfect stated Tom. Thank you.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >>>> From: Tom Fifield [mailto:tom at openstack.org]
>>> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, 17 December 2013 11:23 AM
>>> >>>> To: openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and Users
>>> at
>>> >>> the next
>>> >>>> summit
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 17/12/13 02:55, Tim Bell wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Specifying something as a bug needs to determine things like 'what
>>> >>>>> component should this be addressed in' and describing the desired
>>> >>>>> behaviour. Many of the comments from the survey describe the pain
>>> >>>>> points, rather than the solutions. Upgrading is difficult, no
>>> >>>>> mechanism to auto restart VMs on other hypervisors, monitoring
>>> >>>>> frameworks, inconsistent options in command line tools and APIs, .
>>> >>>>> equally, missing functional gaps do not fall well into the bug
>>> > system.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I have received the feedback from operators when raising issues
>>> that
>>> >>>>> they get the response 'contributions are welcome'. Running an
>>> >>>>> openstack cloud can be non-trivial, especially the big ones, and
>>> >>>>> there is a need to appreciate that this effort is a significant
>>> part
>>> >>>>> of the OpenStack community effort (along with the blogs, the
>>> >>>>> documentation updates, the summit presentations).
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I personally have a different proposal to Tristan (although I like
>>> >>>>> his). my proposal is that each program should have a session
>>> >>>>> dedicated to user/operator needs at the start. Between the UC, the
>>> >>>>> volunteers to look at the survey comments and the user group
>>> >>>>> ambassadors, we should be able to put together a set of pain points
>>> >>>>> to be considered for the next release. solutions are up to the
>>> > design teams.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> While I think that having such a session in each program fits well
>>> >>>> with
>>> >>> "our" (being
>>> >>>> "the developers'") mentality and/or schedule, I feel that it does
>>> not
>>> >>> suit with that of
>>> >>>> operators.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> This is because, as an operator, you typically don't just have
>>> >>>> problems
>>> >>> or feedback
>>> >>>> with one project.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Looking through the survey comments, it's likely that if those kind
>>> >>>> of
>>> >>> operators were
>>> >>>> attending summits, they'd have to attend a high fraction of every
>>> >>>> such
>>> >>> session.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> In addition, points of pain can often be about the integration
>>> >>>> between
>>> >>> services, the
>>> >>>> consistency between them, or whole-of-project issues. Like the fact
>>> >>>> our
>>> >>> python
>>> >>>> clients all have different import lines, or the way DNS works
>>> between
>>> >>> Nova and
>>> >>>> Neutron, and so on.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> The conversation of late has been leaning towards a happy scenario
>>> >>>> where "operators" and "developers" come together in a session and
>>> the
>>> >>>> former
>>> >>> presents
>>> >>>> their concerns to the latter, who promptly go away and Fix All The
>>> >>> Things.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> To be frank, having been on the "operator" side of the fence, and
>>> >>> participating in all
>>> >>>> of the frequent cursing, desk-slamming, whiteboard-workarounding,
>>> >>> nagios-alert-
>>> >>>> spam-receiving it takes to run an OpenStack cloud ... I'm not sure
>>> we
>>> >>> can let
>>> >>>> "operators" loose in such a session without some kind of filter - it
>>> >>> might put
>>> >>>> "developers" off helping if we descent into full sysadmin rant :)
>>> But
>>> >>>> we
>>> >>> do need to
>>> >>>> get that feedback through somehow.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I have full appreciation for the session that the swift team ran
>>> with
>>> >>> the LINE guys at
>>> >>>> Hong Kong - that was seriously awesome to hear about and we should
>>> be
>>> >>> doing
>>> >>>> more of it. Though, I believe some of the value came from the fact
>>> >>>> that
>>> >>> it was an
>>> >>>> individual user stepping through their entire requirements.
>>> >>>> Challenging
>>> >>> the
>>> >>>> assumptions. Quite different from a torrent of people in a room :)
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> The survey comments we've got are good, as is the plan Tim has put
>>> >>> together to
>>> >>>> wrangle them into a format where they perhaps can be taken to
>>> >>>> developers
>>> >>> as bugs,
>>> >>>> or blueprints - as Joe suggested. However, due to the nature of the
>>> >>> survey, they are
>>> >>>> most often brief, and surface-level.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I believe what "getting Operators in a room" can achieve for us is
>>> >>> providing that
>>> >>>> same kind of feedback, but with far greater depth than can be
>>> >>>> achieved
>>> >>> by a 200
>>> >>>> pixel survey box.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> A scenario I'd propose is to arrange something where we:
>>> >>>> 1. allow the full-descent into sysadmin rant, where people feel
>>> >>> comfortable to air
>>> >>>> each and every grievance they've had with any part of OpenStack,
>>> >>> recording all of
>>> >>>> this (in a manipulable, written format minus
>>> >>>> cursing)
>>> >>>> 2. refuel our sysadmins with [beverage], while a small team attempts
>>> >>>> to
>>> >>> wrangle the
>>> >>>> mass of comment into something that can be discussed 3. bring back
>>> in
>>> >>> the fearless
>>> >>>> operators, then have a more structured discussion about which items
>>> >>>> are
>>> >>> really the
>>> >>>> big ones - and dive deeper into those so a full understanding is had
>>> >>>> of
>>> >>> use-
>>> >>>> cases/'whys'/'whats'
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> at the conclusion of this session, we clean it up a bit and can pass
>>> >>>> it
>>> >>> on to our super-
>>> >>>> awesome "developers", who probably haven't had time to make it to
>>> >>>> this
>>> >>> multi-hour
>>> >>>> session, but will subsequently bow in awe of all of the awesome
>>> >>> suggestions and
>>> >>>> people who love their work :)
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> For thoroughness, this passing-to could happen at
>>> session-per-program
>>> >>>> as suggested, or in some other asynchronous way.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Regards,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Tom
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Tim
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> *From:*Joe Gordon [mailto:joe.gordon0 at gmail.com]
>>> >>>>> *Sent:* 16 December 2013 18:38
>>> >>>>> *To:* Tristan Goode
>>> >>>>> *Cc:* openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and
>>> Users
>>> >>>>> at the next summit
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Tristan Goode <
>>> tristan at aptira.com
>>> >>>>> <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I'm trying to establish a feedback loop "because" we (Operators,
>>> >>>>> Users, etc)
>>> >>>>> need to better present our actual real world, evidence based
>>> >>>>> Operator, User,
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> and even other input like Sales and Marketing experiences back
>>> >>>>> into the
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> development teams. Much of this does and will come from the great
>>> >>>>> work of
>>> >>>>> the UC, the User surveys, and especially the folks that have
>>> >>>>> volunteered to
>>> >>>>> analyse the survey results. I'm hoping to build on the survey
>>> >>>>> analysis and
>>> >>>>> collaboratively and constructively focus that to present a
>>> >>> blueprint or
>>> >>>>> roadmap with a "whole of OpenStack" scope. We can dig deeper into
>>> >>>>> the user
>>> >>>>> survey feedback and break beyond the bounds of the limited format
>>> >>> of the
>>> >>>>> user survey to seed the discussion. For me, the most valuable
>>> >>> session in
>>> >>>>> Hong Kong was the discussion led by Tim of the user survey. It
>>> > was
>>> >>>>> however,
>>> >>>>> all too short.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Do you have any examples of what kind of feedback you would like to
>>> >>>>> pass on to developers (I was unable to attend Tim's discussion of
>>> >>>>> the user survey)? Also just playing devils advocate here, but why
>>> >>>>> not use our bug system to provide feedback?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >>>>>> From: Sean Dague [mailto:sean at dague.net <mailto:sean at dague.net>]
>>> >>>>>> Sent: Saturday, 14 December 2013 3:02 AM
>>> >>>>>> To: openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and
>>> >>> Users
>>> >>>>> at the
>>> >>>>>> next
>>> >>>>>> summit
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> So not that I don't think this is a worth while thing, because I
>>> >>>>> think it
>>> >>>>>> is. But instead
>>> >>>>>> of jumping to the solution of a User Day, it might be useful to
>>> >>>>> figure out
>>> >>>>>> what's
>>> >>>>>> attempting to be solved.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Is it?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> 1) get Users together to share best practices among themselves?
>>> >>>>> Because
>>> >>>>>> lots of
>>> >>>>>> people have learned things, and want to bootstrap others.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> 2) get Users and Operators together to share best practices
>>> >>> among
>>> >>>>>> themselves?
>>> >>>>>> Because ...
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> 3) get Vendors and Users and Operators together? Because ...
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> 4) get Developers and Users and Operators together? Because ....
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> I think if you start with defining the Because ... part, then
>>> >>> the
>>> >>>>> needed
>>> >>>>>> parties, then
>>> >>>>>> the odds of this being successful and useful to folks goes way
>>> >>> up.
>>> >>>>> It also
>>> >>>>>> would give
>>> >>>>>> people attending a reasonable expectation of what they are going
>>> >>>>> to get
>>> >>>>>> out of it.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Because it would be a shame to set up #1, if most people thought
>>> >>>>> they were
>>> >>>>>> getting
>>> >>>>>> #4 (which is basically what Lorin was proposing with his adopt a
>>> >>>>> developer
>>> >>>>>> idea),
>>> >>>>>> then people being disappointed that they didn't get what they
>>> >>>>> thought they
>>> >>>>>> were
>>> >>>>>> getting.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> The design summit works pretty well for the development
>>> >>> community
>>> >>>>> because
>>> >>>>>> of
>>> >>>>>> how narrowly it is scoped. So a critical mass in each of those
>>> >>>>> rooms knows
>>> >>>>>> when it's
>>> >>>>>> getting off track and how to pull it back to something
>>> >>> actionable
>>> >>>>> at the
>>> >>>>>> end.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> -Sean
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On 12/13/2013 06:05 AM, Tristan Goode wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> I guess what I'm trying to say by "Users and Operators" covers
>>> >>>>>>> carriers and telcos. By User I mean folks that consume
>>> >>> OpenStack
>>> >>>>>>> resources and by Operator I mean folks that supply OpenStack
>>> >>>>>>> resources. Maybe all can be called Users but whatever one
>>> >>> calls it,
>>> >>>>>>> what I mean basically is Non-Developers actually working on
>>> >>> and with
>>> >>>>>>> OpenStack. :)
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Cheers
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Tristan
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> *From:*Kyle MacDonald [mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com
>>> >>>>> <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>> <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com
>>> >>>> <mailto:kyle.macdonald at gmail.com>>]
>>> >>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 12 December 2013 7:02 PM
>>> >>>>>>> *To:* Tristan Goode
>>> >>>>>>> *Cc:* openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>> >>>>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>>
>>> >>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] Bringing focus to the Operators and
>>> >>> Users
>>> >>>>>>> at the next summit
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Tristan
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I like this idea and agree it should be a priority. I do
>>> >>> suggest the
>>> >>>>>>> focus area be expanded (or a second focus day) to accommodate
>>> >>>>> carriers
>>> >>>>>>> and telcos and their operations needs (they are real
>>> >>> operators).
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> There is a ton of work being done by the leading telco's
>>> >>> around NFV
>>> >>>>>>> and SDN (many in emerging use cases) using OpenStack. I can
>>> >>> very
>>> >>>>>>> easily see "operations" being a killer issue and something
>>> >>> that
>>> >>>>> should
>>> >>>>>>> be more broadly addressed. Last summit the forum for that
>>> >>> track of
>>> >>>>>>> discussions was by a vendor - next summit this area should be
>>> >>> made
>>> >>>>>>> more neutral and inclusive.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Kyle
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 10:55 PM, Tristan Goode
>>> >>> <tristan at aptira.com
>>> >>>>> <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>
>>> >>>>>>> <mailto:tristan at aptira.com <mailto:tristan at aptira.com>>>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> G'day OpenStackLand,
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I have an idea for the next summit to put forward...
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Like we have the various project design summit session
>>> >>> days
>>> >>>>> at the
>>> >>>>>>> summits, I think it'd be really useful to have an
>>> >>> Operators and
>>> >>>>>>> Users day at the very start of the next summit (and
>>> >>>>> hopefully all of
>>> >>>>>>> them in future if it works out). So far at the last 4
>>> >>>>> summits I've
>>> >>>>>>> attended, from the users and operators point of view we've
>>> >>>>> had a rag
>>> >>>>>>> tag bunch of disconnected panels and 40 minute sessions
>>> >>> that
>>> >>>>> really
>>> >>>>>>> don't get anywhere much and don't make it to any sort of
>>> >>> plan or
>>> >>>>>>> worthwhile result. This proposed "Operators and Users" day
>>> >>>>> will be
>>> >>>>>>> run like the design summit session days where all of us
>>> >>> that
>>> >>>>> have to
>>> >>>>>>> deal with the consequences of the software development of
>>> >>> this
>>> >>>>>>> project sit in a room and work the issues. The goal is to
>>> >>>>> present
>>> >>>>>>> real world, evidence based Operator, User, and even other
>>> >>>>> input like
>>> >>>>>>> Sales and Marketing experiences back into the development
>>> >>> teams.
>>> >>>>>>> Maybe we might even have our own "Operators and Users"
>>> >>>>> lounge too.
>>> >>>>>>> :-P
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Cheers
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Tristan
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>>>> Mailing list:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>>>>> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>> >>>>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>>
>>> >>>>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>>>> Mailing list:
>>> >>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>>>>> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>> >>>>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>> >>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>> Sean Dague
>>> >>>>>> http://dague.net
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>> Mailing list:
>>> >>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>>> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> <mailto:openstack at lists.openstack.org>
>>> >>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>> >>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>> Mailing list:
>>> >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>>> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>>> Unsubscribe :
>>> >>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> Mailing list:
>>> >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>>> Unsubscribe :
>>> >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>>
>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>> Mailing list:
>>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >>> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >>> Unsubscribe :
>>> >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Mailing list:
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> > Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> > Unsubscribe :
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list:
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> Unsubscribe :
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list:
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe :
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>
>
--
Thanks,
-Sriram
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20131221/d99abf78/attachment.html>
More information about the Openstack
mailing list