Open Stack

An architecture that is "ready to operate" could be one of a fairly large
number of valid combinations of components, which I think dilutes the value
of the reference architecture(s) significantly.

In my view the trick here will be to define the boundaries of the reference
architecture such that it can plug into the various ancillary components
required to make it operable. That definition should be based on
capability, starting with the OpenStack core definition presumably, but
then what should be included?

- HA
- Which of the integrated capabilities outside of defcore should go in?
Perhaps none is the simplest answer, but not necessarily a useful one for
consumers of the RA. Neutron? Horizon?

I would specifically exclude:

- deployment, beyond the simplest goal of getting the reference
architecture running
- monitoring
- any other lifecycle management capabilities

on the grounds that there are too many types of solutions to fit within the
concept of a reference architecture, and also to avoid descending into the
rabbit-hole of individual preferences. The nascent "Operations Project"
aims to provide options in the key areas, and I would prefer to leave it to
them and anyone else tackling specific use cases.

​​
Roland



On 20 January 2015 at 08:51, Rochelle Grober <rochelle.grober at huawei.com>
wrote:

> Shamail [mailto:itzshamail at gmail.com], Monday, January 19, 2015 12:51 PM
> wrote:
>
> Hi Rocky,
>
> I changed the topic to separate the voting from the RA topic that you
> mentioned.  I think it's a good idea but I would be glad to share a "user
> reference architecture" initiative that the WTE (Win The Enterprise) WG is
> planning to work on ASAP.  This concept is slightly different from what you
> described below since these reference architectures will be driven by
> customer deployment examples versus prescribed architectures given scale or
> projects.  I'd be interested in determining whether the need for both
> exists or whether one (or the other) is a superset.
>
> [Rockyg] I suspect that both the WTE and the operators will have
> architectures that dovetail, as the operators are often implementing the
> needs of their organizations.  I would think that we could up with good
> compromises that reflect both the WTE use cases and the Dev-Ops common
> implementations.  The cool and key thing here is that, the groups come up
> with a reference architecture which then makes it much easier to iterate to
> what the individual user wants/needs.
>
> Sounds like the discussion could be fun and productive.
> --Rocky
>
>
>
> Happy to discuss further when we meet in person.
>
> Thanks,
> Shamail
>
> > On Jan 19, 2015, at 3:39 PM, Rochelle Grober <rochelle.grober at huawei.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I believe Rob Hirschfeld will be in attendance so, Rob (and I if he
> wants me) can cover the DefCore and Refstack session.  Rob is certainly the
> expert on DefCore.
> >
> > I'd also like to propose a session on defining/finding a project manager
> to start creating some reference architectures with tested installs.  Right
> now there is a discussion on the Operators' list on a small installation,
> 3-5 nodes, with HA.  This could be a fine first reference architecture with
> all the code and docs to make it similar (or better) to install than
> devstack.  This is also a good architecture for prospective users for
> prototyping, testing, or small business installation.  Spec'ing this out
> during the summit, or at least getting a good start, along with a volunteer
> project manager, would be a very worthwhile endeavor for the meetup.
> >
> > --Rocky
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sean roberts [mailto:seanroberts66 at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2015 11:44 AM
> > To: product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: [Product] Time to Pick Topics
> >
> > It’s time to finalize the OpenStack Product Management topics for the
> Kilo
> > midcycle meeting
> > <
> http://sarob.com/2015/01/openstack-kilo-product-management-midcycle-coming-to-a-greater-understanding/
> >
> > coming
> > up. We will need speakers for each topic. I want to get the best
> authority
> > possible for each talk, so locking down the topics is required. I will
> need
> > to get their commitment as soon as possible.
> >
> > More details on this post
> >
> http://sarob.com/2015/01/getting-ready-for-the-product-management-kilo-midcycle/
> >
> >
> > --
> > ~sean
> > _______________________________________________
> > Product-wg mailing list
> > Product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
> > _______________________________________________
> > Product-wg mailing list
> > Product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
> _______________________________________________
> Product-wg mailing list
> Product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/product-wg
>