* balaj...@freescale.com (balaj...@freescale.com) wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mest...@noironetworks.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:19 AM > > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][NFV] NFV BoF at design summit > > > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Ian Wells <ijw.ubu...@cack.org.uk> > > wrote: > > > I think the Service VM discussion resolved itself in a way that > > > reduces the problem to a form of NFV - there are standing issues using > > > VMs for services, orchestration is probably not a responsibility that > > > lies in Neutron, and as such the importance is in identifying the > > > problems with the plumbing features of Neutron that cause > > > implementation difficulties. The end result will be that VMs > > > implementing tenant services and implementing NFV should be much the > > > same, with the addition of offering a multitenant interface to > > Openstack users on the tenant service VM case. > > > > > > Geoff Arnold is dealing with the collating of information from people > > > that have made the attempt to implement service VMs. The problem > > > areas should fall out of his effort. I also suspect that the key > > > points of NFV that cause problems (for instance, dealing with VLANs > > > and trunking) will actually appear quite high up the service VM list as > > well. > > > -- > > There is a weekly meeting for the Service VM project [1], I hope some > > representatives from the NFB sub-project can make it to this meeting and > > participate there. > [P Balaji-B37839] I agree with Kyle, so that we will have enough synch > between Service VM and NFV goals.
Makes good sense. Will make sure to get someone there. thanks, -chris _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev