Hi Jay, Thank you for your replies.
2016-11-16 11:38 GMT+09:00 Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com>: > On 11/14/2016 10:22 PM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote: >> >> 2016-11-14 2:19 GMT+09:00 Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com >> <mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com>>: >>> >>> On 11/13/2016 01:52 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote: >>>> >>>> No. "physical storages" means storage products like EMC VNX, NetApp >>>> Data ONTAP, HPE Lefthand and so on. >>>> Say there is a new service named X to manage them. A user, he/she will >>>> be a new IaaS admin, requests many baremetal servers to Ironic and >>>> some baremetal storages to X. After they are provided, he/she will >>>> start to build a new OpenStack deployment with them. Nova in the new >>>> one will provide VMs on the servers and Cinder will manage logical >>>> volumes on the storages. X doesn't manage each logical volume but >>>> pools, user accounts and network connections of the storages. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, I personally believe that is the domain of configuration management >>> systems not OpenStack HTTP API services. What you are describing is not a >>> multi-tenant HTTP API service, it's an IT/storage admin automation tool. >>> >>> Incidentally, Ironic isn't multi-tenant either. It lives in the weird >>> land >>> in OpenStack of being an HTTP API service that isn't meant for "normal >>> users" so in order to provider a cloud service (BareMetal-as-a-Service), >>> Ironic *requires* Nova to provide the multi-tenancy aspects of the >>> "as-a-Service" part of the software. >> >> >> Hmm... so, if I built a (multi-tenant) baremetal IaaS service like >> SoftLayer >> with OpenStack Newton release, tenant users can deploy an OpenStack >> environment with cinder using SDS on it. No physical storages. > > > I think what you're trying to describe is that you want to build a cloud > reseller platform where the reseller tenants would be able to provision raw > storage for an OpenStack deployment that is then resold to end-users as a > hosted cloud service. > > Is that correct? Yes, it is. Sorry for my few description. > If so, yeah, there really isn't anything like that in the OpenStack > ecosystem, and frankly, I think it would be a tough sell to have that in > OpenStack because it is so very deployer and vendor-specific. Essentially > you want to allow reseller tenants to make SAN hardware management calls via > an API that is exposed through the normal OpenStack HTTP APIs. And I don't > think that is something that is all that abstractable :( Hmm... it looks better that: a) cinder in the "undercloud" OpenStack deployment provides big volumes for "overcloud" OpenStack deployments. b) cinder in an overcloud provides volumes from them with LVM/iSCSI driver. > Best, > -jay Best, Akira >>> Ironic is great, of course, but it ain't a cloud service without help >>> from >>> Nova. >>> >>> Best, >>> -jay >> >> >> BR, >> Akira >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- 吉山あきら <akirayoshiy...@gmail.com> __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev