My personal feeling:

We need to be very very careful. While I really respect Jay Pipes and his
commentary, I fundamentally disagree with his toolbox mindset. OpenStack is
one tool in the Enterprise toolbox. It isn't a toolbox. K8s is another tool
in the toolbox since it's turning out to be much more than just a container
management platform. Believe it or not AWS is another.

I've been an OpenStack architect for at least 5+ years now and work with
many large Fortune 100 IT shops. OpenStack in the enterprise is being used
to orchestrate virtual machines. Despite the additional capabilities
OpenStack is trying to accommodate, that's basically it. At scale, that's
what they're doing. Not many are orchestrating bare metal that I've seen or
heard. And they are exploring K8s and Docker Swarm to orchestrate
containers. They aren't looking at OpenStack to do that. I recently
attended the K8s conference in Berlin this year and I'll tell you, the
container community is not looking at OpenStack as the means to manage
containers. If they are, they were likely sitting at the OpenStack booth.
Additionally these enterprises are not going to use two platforms side by
side with two means of orchestrating resources. That's both unrealistic and
understandable. Shoe-horning K8s into an OpenStack model really underserves
the container user space.

OpenStack's approach is to treat K8s as a tool.
K8s is working to classify OpenStack as a tool.

So to me we're one of two - maybe one of three solid FOSS cloud platforms -
not including Azure and AWS which are both trending up in consumer adoption
again. All of these are aiming to orchestrate the same resources and in
different ways, they each do it very well. A One Platform vision coming
from the minds within one of those projects creates unnecessary friction
and sounds a little small-minded. Big world out there - we're not the only

In the end I guess I'm trying to say that we need to be careful when we
make assertions because this vision sounds like we're drinking too much of
our own Kool-Aid. When we assume our platform orchestrates the heap, we
need to understand there are several other heaps getting bigger and do
things OpenStack can't. If we buy into a marketing vision, we start a
downward path towards where Eucalyptus and CloudStack are today.

Just my oh, 3 cents worth. ; )


*Adam Lawson*

Principal Architect
Office: +1-916-794-5706 <(916)%20794-5706>

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Flavio Percoco <> wrote:

> On 16/04/17 09:03 +0100, Neil Jerram wrote:
>> FWIW, I think the Lego analogy is not actually helpful for another
>> reason: it has vastly too many ways of combining, and (hence) no sense at
>> all of consistency / interoperability between the different things that you
>> can construct with it. Whereas for OpenStack I believe you are also aiming
>> for some forms of consistency and interoperability.
> Could you expand on why you think the lego analogy does not cover
> consistency
> and interoperability?
> Flavio
> --
> @flaper87
> Flavio Percoco
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Reply via email to