Gal, if you have some time to coordinate this with the service chaining/firewall folks and start a spec, it’d be amazing.
Best regards, Miguel Angel Ajo On Friday 5 June 2015 at 12:42, Vikram Choudhary wrote: > Hi Gal, > > It's really nice that you are also interested. Myself and Miguel was also > talking about this over the summit ;) > Let's take care of this together ;) > > Thanks > Vikram > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Gal Sagie <[email protected] > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > Another use case is for security/firewall classifiers. > > > > I agree with this and i think me and Miguel talked about it in the summit, > > but in order for this to go > > forward someone need to start creating a spec and managing this effort. > > > > Since you proposed it first Vikram, will you do it? > > If not i will gladly take this on myself. > > > > Gal. > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Vikram Choudhary > > <[email protected] (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > Thanks Miguel! > > > > > > From: Miguel Angel Ajo [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: 05 June 2015 14:12 > > > To: Vikram Choudhary > > > Cc: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]); > > > Henry Fourie; Cathy Zhang; [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]); > > > Dongfeng (C); Kyle Mestery; [email protected] > > > (mailto:[email protected]); Dhruv Dhody; Kalyankumar > > > Asangi > > > Subject: [neutron] Regarding Flow classifiers existing proposals > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Added openstack-dev, where I believe this conversation must live. > > > > > > > > > > > > I totally agree on this, thank you for bringing up this conversation. > > > This is not something we want to do for QoS this cycle, but probably next > > > cycle. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, an unified data model and API to create/update classifiers will > > > not only be beneficial from the code duplication point of view, but will > > > also provide a better user experience. > > > > > > > > > > > > I’m all for it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Miguel Ángel Ajo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday 5 June 2015 at 09:57, Vikram Choudhary wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are multiple proposal floating around flow classifier rules for > > > > Liberty [1], [2] and [3]. > > > > > > > > > > > > I feel we all should work together and try to address all our use case > > > > having a unified framework rather than working separately achieving the > > > > same goal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover, I can find the proposal for flow classifier as defined by the > > > > existing SFC [2] proposal is too generic and could address all the use > > > > cases by minor extension’s. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this regard, I would like all to come forward, exchange their > > > > thoughts, work together and make it happen good the first go rather > > > > doing the same effort separately and end up in duplicating code & > > > > effort L. > > > > > > > > > > > > I always feel less code will make our life happy in the long run ;) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know about your views. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] Add Neutron API extensions for packet forwarding > > > > > > > > > > > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/186663/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [2] Neutron API for Service Chaining [Flow Filter resource] > > > > > > > > > > > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177946/6/specs/liberty/neutron-api-for-service-chaining.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [3] QoS API Extension [Defines classifier rule in QoSRule. Classifier > > > > rule can really grow big in the long run]: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88599/10/specs/liberty/qos-api-extension.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > Vikram > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > > Unsubscribe: > > > [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > > > (http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe) > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best Regards , > > > > The G. > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > > (http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe) > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
