On 06/08/14 12:40, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/05/2014 11:25 PM, Tom Fifield wrote:
On 06/08/14 03:54, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/05/2014 03:23 PM, Collins, Sean wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 12:50:45PM EDT, Monty Taylor wrote:
However, I think the cost to providing that path far outweighs
the benefit in the face of other things on our plate.
Perhaps those large operators that are hoping for a
Nova-Network->Neutron zero-downtime live migration, could dedicate
resources to this requirement? It is my direct experience that features
that are important to a large organization will require resources
from that very organization to be completed.
Indeed, that's partly why I called out Metacloud in the original post,
as they were brought up as a deployer with this potential need. Please,
if there are any other shops that:
* Currently deploy nova-network
* Need to move to Neutron
* Their tenants cannot tolerate any downtime due to a cold migration
Please do comment on this thread and speak up.
Just to chip in for the dozens of users I have personally spoken to that
do have the requirement for nova-network to neutron migration, and would
be adversely affected if it was not implemented prior to deprecating
nova-network: raising this concept only on a development mailing list is
a bad idea :)
If anyone is serious about not providing a proper migration path for
these users that need it, there is a need to be yelling this for
probably a few of summits in a row and every OpenStack event we have in
between, as well as the full gamut of periodic surveys, blogs, twitters,
weibos, linkedins, facebooks etc,
Well, yes, I agree that other methods of gathering that information
would indeed be good. I'll work on that.
Note, however, that nobody is suggesting not having a migration path.
I'm just suggesting relaxing the requirement that the migration from
nova-network to neutron be without any downtime of instances.
These users do not consider that a migration path, so actually that is
what is being suggested.
OpenStack-dev mailing list