Re: [Openstack] How to Install OpenStack ???????????
Tiny product plug for Piston's Enterprise OpenStack distro as well. Neutron support is in our next release, but we can fix you up with a beta if it's critical. -- Joshua McKenty Chief Technology Officer Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. +1 (650) 242-5683 +1 (650) 283-6846 http://www.pistoncloud.com "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has." On Jul 12, 2013, at 11:10 AM, Samuel Winchenbach wrote: > Wow, Mirantis Fuel looks impressive. Very impressive. Thanks for pointing > that out. > > I wonder if there support for Quantum/Neutron. Hmm I might have to play > around with that. > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Logan McNaughton wrote: > I think these are the 3 best options for an automated OpenStack install: > > RDO (Packstack), supports RHEL, CentOS, Fedora. > > MAAS/Juju, supports Ubuntu. > > Mirantis Fuel, supports RHEL/CentOS for now, they say Ubuntu support is > coming. > > Try all 3 if you can. Fuel was just recently open sourced and has a pretty > fancy web GUI. > On Jul 12, 2013 10:16 AM, "Min Pae" wrote: > I was able to go from nothing to a running Openstack environment using > Ubuntu Juju/MAAS inside 2 weeks with no prior knowledge or experience > with Juju nor MAAS nor Openstack. The trick seemed to be having > enough boxes as some charms didn't seem to like running on the same > boxes or whatever, and I ended up with a non-functional dashboard when > trying to install all the services to the same box. Currently I have > it working well with 7 physical boxes in total with one of those being > a nova-compute node. > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:39 AM, claudio marques > wrote: > > Hi > > > > You can use this guide to. > > > > https://github.com/mseknibilel/OpenStack-Grizzly-Install-Guide > > > > Good luck > > > > Claudio Marques > > > > clau...@onesource.pt > > http://www.onesource.pt/ > > > > > > > > From: luisguilherme...@gmail.com > > Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:56:18 -0300 > > To: dj_dark_jungl...@yahoo.com > > CC: openstack@lists.launchpad.net > > > > Subject: Re: [Openstack] How to Install OpenStack ??? > > > > Hello Jake, I am new at OpenStack too, and I'm running a little environment > > with three computers, one is the controller + network node and the others > > are compute node. I've been following the manual at the OpenStack's > > documentation page but it's attached here, the most mess part is to create > > the networks, I ran the script attached too. Hope it helps you. > > > > Regards. > > > > Guilherme. > > > > > > > > 2013/7/12 Jake G. > > > > Hi Mark, > > > > Thanks for your reply. I have about 3 physical rack servers and practically > > unlimited virtual machines. > > Right now I only need a test environment. I was thinking one physical server > > that will house and power openstack instances and virtual for all the other > > roles. > > > > How does that sound? What is your recommended setup? > > > > Best, > > Jake > > > > > > > > > > From: Mark Baker > > To: Jake G. > > Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 6:05 PM > > Subject: Re: [Openstack] How to Install OpenStack ??? > > > > On 12/07/13 07:58, Jake G. wrote: > > > > Hi All, I have been struggling with installing Openstack for the past 2 > > weeks and I am about to rip my own hair out. > > > > > > Does anyone have installation instructions that a human being can actually > > understand and follow? I am usually pretty good at installing new tech but > > OpenStack is the most convoluted environment (even worse documentation) I > > have ever come in contact with (Worse than IBM software). The advanced > > install and config of CloudStack 4.1 is a breeze compare to Openstack. Was > > this made to purposely line the pockets of Openstack deployment consulting > > companies? Openstack might be great but no one will know because its > > impossible to deploy. > > > > > > I`m sure I am not the only one who feels this way. I would appreciate any > > help anyone can give. Someones blog, other installation methods, > > anything > > > > > > How many servers do you have? > > > > Instructions for using the Ubuntu packaging are at: > > > > http://www.ubuntu.com/download/cloud/install-ubuntu-cloud > > > > There
Re: [Openstack] Horizon PTL Candidacy
I'd like to nominate your alter-ego of "Terrance Dope" to this list of qualifications, and endorse your whiskey expertise. On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Gabriel Hurley wrote: > Hi folks! > > I'm nominating myself for Horizon PTL for another term. I want to continue > fighting for cross-service integration/standardization, better APIs for > everyone, and the best possible user interface to introduce people to what > OpenStack can do. > > Quick recap of my qualifications: current Horizon PTL, Horizon core and > Keystone core since Essex, Django core contributor, commits to nearly all > of the core OpenStack projects, extremely comprehensive knowledge of > OpenStack's APIs, and a connoisseur of both OpenStack and fine whiskeys. > > Here's to a fantastic Havana release cycle! > > - Gabriel > > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > -- -- Joshua McKenty, CTO Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. w: (650) 24-CLOUD m: (650) 283-6846 http://www.pistoncloud.com "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has." ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] Fwd: using Win AD authentication as keystone backend
Wenmao- I've seen translucent LDAP proxies used for this type of operation, although typically to provide additional attributes rather than additional users. -- Sent from a tiny keyboard On Jan 22, 2013 4:23 AM, "Liu Wenmao" wrote: > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Liu Wenmao > Date: Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 4:55 PM > Subject: Re: [Openstack] using Win AD authentication as keystone backend > To: Tim Bell > > > Thanks Bell > > is it possible to use active directory and mysql database at the same > time? for example, keystone first query the user in AD, if nothing is > found, it then query mysql database. > > The motivation is that I want to store service users(glance, nova) in > mysql and use current AD database for employee login. > > Wenmao > > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Tim Bell wrote: > >> We run Active Directory with Keystone at CERN. >> >> ** ** >> >> The configuration is documented by Jose in the Wiki at >> http://wiki.openstack.org/HowtoIntegrateKeystonewithAD. >> >> ** ** >> >> Not sure if all the patches made it into Folsom though. >> >> ** ** >> >> Tim >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* openstack-bounces+tim.bell=cern...@lists.launchpad.net [mailto: >> openstack-bounces+tim.bell=cern...@lists.launchpad.net] *On Behalf Of *Liu >> Wenmao >> *Sent:* 22 January 2013 04:23 >> *To:* openstack@lists.launchpad.net >> *Subject:* [Openstack] using Win AD authentication as keystone backend*** >> * >> >> ** ** >> >> hello all: >> >> ** ** >> >> My company use Windows AD(active directory) authentication for internal >> user login, is it possible to integrate the current authentication with >> keystone backend, so that we do not extra user/password maintaining. Hope >> Openstack Folsom has an easy and stable solution. >> >> ** ** >> >> thanks >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> Wenmao Liu >> >> NSFOCUS >> > > > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] Wasted Compute node disk space
Greg - this is how we do it. See "Null-Tier Architecture" at http://www.pistoncloud.com/cloud-technology/cloud-architecture/ . Note that it's not just CPU - you end up needing more RAM and Network bandwidth as well. Joshua On Jan 8, 2013, at 8:22 AM, Greg Chavez wrote: > > Razique, > > Yes. We have the OS on a RAID 1 and the rest of the disks are in a RAID 10. > However, should we go with the Compute+Swift Node architecture, we'll be > using this: > > [root@kvm-cs-gen-09i ~]# df -h > FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/mapper/vg00-root > 130G 1.9G 122G 2% / > tmpfs 379G 0 379G 0% /dev/shm > /dev/sda1 194M 33M 152M 18% /boot > /dev/sdb1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift1 > /dev/sdc1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift2 > /dev/sdd1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift3 > /dev/sde1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift4 > /dev/sdf1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift5 > /dev/sdg1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift6 > /dev/sdh1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift7 > /dev/sdi1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift8 > > What do you think? > > --Greg > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Razique Mahroua > wrote: > Hey Greg, > so if I understand well, you want to have the disk on the hypervisors be used > as Swift nodes right? > is there any underlying RAID? > > Regards, > Razique Mahroua - Nuage & Co > razique.mahr...@gmail.com > Tel : +33 9 72 37 94 15 > > > > Le 8 janv. 2013 à 16:28, Greg Chavez a écrit : > >> >> We are in the process of replacing our Diablo KVM infrastructure with >> Folsom. Up until now, our virts have been using the local Compute node's >> disk space for their images which, obviously, defeats much of the purpose of >> a virtualizing. We are ready to implement an iSCSI SAN, but we're a bit >> bummed that we're going to essentially be wasting the copious disk space on >> all the systems we ordered to serve as Compute nodes. >> >> SO... we were' thinking about doubling up our Compute nodes and Swift >> storage nodes, fully aware that this might require us to reserve more cores >> for the KVM host. >> >> Has any one else tried this? Is this clearly a bad, bad, bad idea? >> >> Thanks. >> -- >> \*..+.- >> --Greg Chavez >> +//..;}; >> ___ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Openstack] Nomination records
Jonathan, Can you please post all BoD nominations at your earliest convenience? (Including affiliation of the nominator). Based on recent activities, I've recommended to the rest of the corporate sponsors that we suspend and restart the BoD election, pending better tools and an investigation into allegations of… well, IAMAL, but at the very least, gratuitous violations of the Code of Conduct. Hopefully I can submit a more detailed plan for that this afternoon, including some suggestions of neutral third parties who could oversee the election. Cheers, -- Joshua McKenty, CEO Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. w: (650) 24-CLOUD m: (650) 283-6846 http://www.pistoncloud.com "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] [OpenStack Foundation] Foundation Structure: An Alternative
I'm on the look-out for emergent points of consensus, and I think I see one - Sean, you highlighted a 12-member board as being a target, and Dallas mentioned a concern about keeping the board a manageable size as well. Setting aside for a moment the composition (user seats, dev seats, tiered corporate seats vs. all elected, etc) - is a 12-seat board the target? A second question - how would you define a self-affiliated block of companies? I can imagine throwing my vote behind a shared candidate, but would I have the right to pull support during their term, or would I need to wait for the next election? Can we have a vote of no-confidence for such a representative? (I suppose we could always draft a side letter, but I'm hoping for a general-purpose solution). Heidi's name is dirty enough as it is. -- Joshua McKenty, CEO Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. w: (650) 24-CLOUD m: (650) 283-6846 http://www.pistoncloud.com "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has." On Monday, March 12, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Sean Roberts wrote: > How about as many companies that want to contribute annually $100K to running > the foundation separate from marketing and sponsorship, can do so. Each > company or a self-affiliated block of companies can put forward their board > candidate. The companies that contributed to the board can then vote on 2/3 > of the overall board membership. The 8 candidates with the largest number of > votes are board members for one year. The user community would still have 1/3 > of the board seats to elect 4 people of note. The board membership would be > limited to 12 people. This way, all the committees and boards will be elected. > A board membership code of conduct will be very important in this situation, > as to protect the community from some companies up to mischief. > > BTW, I see no reason to dirty the good name of Heidi Klum by dragging her > into this. > sean > roberts > > infrastructure strategy > > sean...@yahoo-inc.com > (applewebdata://2E35986A-DC2A-436F-BB4A-C451982006C2/sean...@yahoo-inc.com) > direct 408-349-5234mobile 925-980-4729 > > 701 first avenue, sunnyvale, ca, 94089-0703, us > phone (408) 349 3300fax (408) 349 3301 > > > > On 3/12/12 11:06 AM, "Dallas Kashuba" (mailto:dal...@dreamhost.com)> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 12, 2012, at 2:45 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > > > Boris Renski Jr. wrote: > > > > While I like the simplicity and elegance of the newly proposed > > > > structure, I don’t see how it does away with the evils of the > > > > pay-to-play model…. Which is what you purport we are striving to > > > > achieve. What you, Josh, proposed is a simplified pay-to-play that > > > > arguably embraces the evils for the “market driven selfishness” in an > > > > even more obvious way than the model before it. In your case, all the > > > > seats are simply purchased for a fixed price of $200K. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right, any pay-to-play model will create a threshold effect, and Josh's > > > proposal is just lowering the price to pay to get a reserved board seat > > > to something that a company like Piston Cloud can pay. Since a lot of > > > the 156 companies "supporting" OpenStack can afford such a price tag, > > > you end up with a board containing too many directors. > > > > > > > > > This is something I was wondering about myself. Would there be a limit on > > the number of directors under Josh's proposal? > > > > > > > > Once we accept this, the question of structuring the board really > > > > becomes the question of how does one raise the maximum amount of money > > > > to continue to have a centralized body with a mission to evangelize the > > > > project. You can structure it by tiers to let the bigger guys pay more > > > > and get a bigger logo on the homepage. You can do a flat structure like > > > > Josh proposed. You can auction off the board seats etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see four models for this: > > > > > > All individual seats: All board seats are elected, you get one vote for > > > every foundation member. Sponsoring is done separately. This is likely > > > to raise the smallest amount of money, and the problem remains at > > > another level: "what is a foundation member ?". > > > > > > > > > I agree that this model is likely to raise t
Re: [Openstack] [OpenStack Foundation] Foundation Structure: An Alternative
In much the same way we’re struggling with creating a reasonably sized board that’s a fair representation of both the diversity of the (producer and consumer) community, and the investments of its sponsors, it feels like we’re also struggling to identify the key stakeholders in actually forming the foundation and a process to make a decision around the foundation structure. At the risk of offending the larger organizations involved, what about adopting the same format that we employed in the FITS Working Group and limit planning committee representation to two representatives from each organization? If, as in the case of Rackspace, the organization itself holds individuals with a diverse set of opinions, then we would hope that the two representatives could be selected to adequately capture such diversity. As a second control, what about limiting the debate to representatives from organizations that are willing to commit (or have already demonstrated) to a minimum of one (1) full-time-equivalent dedicated to OpenStack contributions? This could include not just code contributions, but docs, bugs and localization. However, it would not include directly-commercial activities like training, installation or proprietary extensions. Finally, I’d like to second Sean Roberts’ proposal for a face-to-face meeting, with enough time given to resolve and move forward on the key items of debate. I’m willing to travel if needed, although perhaps we could use a survey or some other method of self-reporting to gather the participants and select a venue. -- Joshua McKenty, CEO Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. w: (650) 24-CLOUD m: (650) 283-6846 http://www.pistoncloud.com "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has." On Monday, March 12, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Sean Roberts wrote: > How about as many companies that want to contribute annually $100K to running > the foundation separate from marketing and sponsorship, can do so. Each > company or a self-affiliated block of companies can put forward their board > candidate. The companies that contributed to the board can then vote on 2/3 > of the overall board membership. The 8 candidates with the largest number of > votes are board members for one year. The user community would still have 1/3 > of the board seats to elect 4 people of note. The board membership would be > limited to 12 people. This way, all the committees and boards will be elected. > A board membership code of conduct will be very important in this situation, > as to protect the community from some companies up to mischief. > > BTW, I see no reason to dirty the good name of Heidi Klum by dragging her > into this. > sean > roberts > > infrastructure strategy > > sean...@yahoo-inc.com > (applewebdata://2E35986A-DC2A-436F-BB4A-C451982006C2/sean...@yahoo-inc.com) > direct 408-349-5234mobile 925-980-4729 > > 701 first avenue, sunnyvale, ca, 94089-0703, us > phone (408) 349 3300fax (408) 349 3301 > > > > On 3/12/12 11:06 AM, "Dallas Kashuba" (mailto:dal...@dreamhost.com)> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 12, 2012, at 2:45 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > > > Boris Renski Jr. wrote: > > > > While I like the simplicity and elegance of the newly proposed > > > > structure, I don’t see how it does away with the evils of the > > > > pay-to-play model…. Which is what you purport we are striving to > > > > achieve. What you, Josh, proposed is a simplified pay-to-play that > > > > arguably embraces the evils for the “market driven selfishness” in an > > > > even more obvious way than the model before it. In your case, all the > > > > seats are simply purchased for a fixed price of $200K. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right, any pay-to-play model will create a threshold effect, and Josh's > > > proposal is just lowering the price to pay to get a reserved board seat > > > to something that a company like Piston Cloud can pay. Since a lot of > > > the 156 companies "supporting" OpenStack can afford such a price tag, > > > you end up with a board containing too many directors. > > > > > > > > > This is something I was wondering about myself. Would there be a limit on > > the number of directors under Josh's proposal? > > > > > > > > Once we accept this, the question of structuring the board really > > > > becomes the question of how does one raise the maximum amount of money > > > > to continue to have a centralized body with a mission to evangelize the > > > > project. You can struct
Re: [Openstack] [OpenStack Foundation] Foundation Structure: An Alternative
This is great! Jonathan, do you think a completely-elected board is something that the larger corporations would go along with? Ben's suggestion to that effect certainly seems to be the simplest model, since we can scale the membership, deliver specific value for cash contributions, and still manage the size of the board. Regarding the "Individual Member" seats - I would like to echo Devin's concerns about stacking by strategic members. If these are truly independent, meaning that they're not employees of the corporate members, then I think it's a great benefit to have them be part of the board! I'm imagining folks like Tim Bell (CERN), Peter Mell (NIST) or Vint Cerf on there. Boris, I completely agree with decoupling of the "business side" of OpenStack from the technical side, and I think managing two separate organizations would be one way to achieve this. My concerns are solely on the business side right now. I've spent a lot of time chatting with the PTLs today, and I have confidence that they can hold the technical community to a meritocratic standard. I think the proposal to vote for seats on the foundation board is more about managing board size, than any crossover of technical community management. Having said that, I'm still concerned with the idea that we would "let the bigger guys pay more and get a bigger logo on the homepage". If we're going to "sell" OpenStack privileges, I think we need to do it ala-cart, and explicitly. Some examples (echoing Ben Cherian's comments) might be: - Use of the trademark (for products, training, or certification) - Sponsorship of openstack events - Priority registration for summits and conferences (not necessarily in favor of this one...) While I was drafting this up, I saw Sean Robert's email suggesting that we meet face-to-face and work through some of this together - it seems like a fantastic plan to me, and I'll bump everything else from my schedule to make it happen if others are interested. What do you guys think? -- Joshua McKenty, CEO Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. w: (650) 24-CLOUD m: (650) 283-6846 http://www.pistoncloud.com "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has." On Friday, March 9, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Jonathan Bryce wrote: > On Mar 9, 2012, at 4:50 PM, Boris Renski Jr. wrote: > > The one thing I would do away with is the “elected board members” in favor > > of more associate member seats. This almost feels like a way to compensate > > the technology side for giving the marketing side leverage over the former. > > If we feel that this is necessary, it is a symptom of presence of > > technology-commercial coupling and we need to fix something else. All > > technical members should be elected based on merit. All board members – > > appointed based on monetary/evangelism contribution. Decoupling between > > technology direction and purchasing power should be rock solid. > > > Thanks for the thoughts, Boris. One point I'd make: the Individual Member > seats are not just about compensating the technology side. It gives an > opportunity for the entire community to elect representatives. These could be > some of the "luminaries" Josh spoke of or others unaffiliated with any > corporate member. Individual Membership is not limited solely to developers > who are contributing code, but would include users, deployers, translators, > marketers and people with all sorts of involvement in the community. > Individual Membership is free and a great place for participants academic > institutions, non-profits, etc. to participate with no price tag. > > Jonathan. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] [OpenStack Foundation] Foundation Structure: An Alternative
Really? Linux was postcard-ware for the first... what, two years? -- Joshua McKenty, CEO Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. w: (650) 24-CLOUD m: (650) 283-6846 http://www.pistoncloud.com "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has." On Friday, March 9, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Robbie Williamson wrote: > On 03/09/2012 02:38 PM, Joshua McKenty wrote: > > I don't believe ANY open source project has ever had this much > > commercial involvement, and certainly not this early in its evolution. > > > > > I suspect Linus might disagree with the first part. > > -- > Robbie Williamson mailto:rob...@ubuntu.com)> > robbiew[irc.freenode.net (http://irc.freenode.net)] > > "Don't make me angry...you wouldn't like me when I'm angry." > -Bruce Banner > ___ > Foundation mailing list > foundat...@lists.openstack.org (mailto:foundat...@lists.openstack.org) > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation > > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] [OpenStack Foundation] Foundation Structure: An Alternative
Dumping this back onto the lists... I believe the primary challenge with the Apache foundation is that it's not structured well to fund marketing or evangelism activities, nor is it designed to take in new members that are primarily interested in a single project. OpenStack is large enough to justify its own organization, and I don't think anyone objects to that foundation being "friendly" to commercial activities - that's part of why we're Apache2 licensed. We just need to balance the commercial mechanics with the community mechanics. This is a hard problem - I don't believe ANY open source project has ever had this much commercial involvement, and certainly not this early in its evolution. But if we want to continue to have a community that's supportive of participation by a diverse set of stakeholders, we all need to speak up. On Friday, March 9, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Thor Wolpert wrote: > Joshua: > > I have not been following this, but had thought that the Foundation > was being modelled on the Apache Group. I did ask a couple of times, > and did get responses that this was the case. What it sounds like is > it continues to stray from that, and that could be the desire of some > special interest groups. > > I thought a Foundation that paid for legal, marketing and core > services; along with a hosted set of projects whose membership was > based upon meritocracy was the model. > > It is sounding like that is not going to be the case. Maybe starting > a new Foundation wasn't the right way to go and asking instead to be a > sub-project of the Apache Group, added in through the incubator > would've been better? > > > > > > With (attempted) diplomacy, > > > > Joshua > > > > -- > > Joshua McKenty > > Co-Founder, OpenStack > > CEO, Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. > > w: (650) 24-CLOUD > > m: (650) 283-6846 > > http://www.pistoncloud.com > > > > "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" > > "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has." > > > > > > ___ > > Foundation mailing list > > foundat...@lists.openstack.org (mailto:foundat...@lists.openstack.org) > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation > > > > > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Openstack] Foundation Structure: An Alternative
- large, small, producers, consumers, non-profits and tool makers. We need to guard that vision, and protect it from our best intentions. No one in the community, whether individual contributor or corporate sponsor, can claim to speak for (or even understand the perspective of) the majority of us. We're simply too numerous, and too diverse. If you believe, as I do, that *your* company should have a stake in OpenStack's future, then now is the time to speak up in favor of the level playing field we originally set out to create. With (attempted) diplomacy, Joshua -- Joshua McKenty Co-Founder, OpenStack CEO, Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. w: (650) 24-CLOUD m: (650) 283-6846 http://www.pistoncloud.com "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!" "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has." ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] GlusterFS project proposal online
If it's a proposal for work to be done within an existing openstack project (e.g., nova-volume), then it would be a blueprint regardless. If it's actually a proposal for a new openstack subproject, then this would be the appropriate spot, but I would ask that you use the http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Approved/NewProjectProcess, which involves publishing source code prior to new project proposal. In that case, I would still suggest you use the wiki for discussion of the proposed project aims and technical decisions - just make it a top-level page. Joshua McKenty Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. (650) 283-6846 jos...@piston.cc On 2011-06-07, at 5:24 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote: > Hi Joshua, this in fact is a proposal albeit not a policy proposal but a > project proposal(not a blueprint either, which is WIP). Is there a more > appropriate place for project proposals? > > Regards > -Shehjar > > Joshua McKenty wrote: >> Shehjar, >> While I'll be able to provide more detailed feedback on the proposal >> itself after I've had a chance to digest it, can I please ask that you >> relocate it on the wiki? The Governance/Proposed section is for >> proposals for policy to be reviewed by the PPB, and not intended for >> blueprints. >> Thanks! >> Joshua McKenty Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. (650) 283-6846 jos...@piston.cc >> On 2011-06-07, at 1:42 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote: >>> For those who havent seen this already, GlusterFS proposal is now >>> available at: >>> http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/OpenStack%20Cloud%20Storage%20(Gluster) >>> Inputs welcome. Please do CC openst...@gluster.com >>> Thanks >>> ___ Mailing list: >>> https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : >>> openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : >>> https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : >>> https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] GlusterFS project proposal online
Shehjar, While I'll be able to provide more detailed feedback on the proposal itself after I've had a chance to digest it, can I please ask that you relocate it on the wiki? The Governance/Proposed section is for proposals for policy to be reviewed by the PPB, and not intended for blueprints. Thanks! Joshua McKenty Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. (650) 283-6846 jos...@piston.cc On 2011-06-07, at 1:42 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote: > For those who havent seen this already, GlusterFS proposal is now available > at: > > http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Proposed/OpenStack%20Cloud%20Storage%20(Gluster) > > Inputs welcome. Please do CC openst...@gluster.com > > Thanks > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] XML and JSON for API's
No, it was the title of my talk at CCA11. The motto is, and will remain, "Free as in speech, love, and beer." Sent from my iPhone On 2011-06-04, at 7:43 PM, Bryan Taylor wrote: > Motto! > > On 6/4/11 9:39 PM, "Joshua McKenty" wrote: > >> Damn, I knew I should have trademarked the "OpenStack, Cloud's Big Tent" >> slogan! > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] XML and JSON for API's
Damn, I knew I should have trademarked the "OpenStack, Cloud's Big Tent" slogan! Sent from my iPhone On 2011-06-04, at 10:37 AM, Bryan Taylor wrote: > On Jun 4, 2011, at 9:14 AM, "Ed Leafe" wrote: > >> On Jun 3, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Bryan Taylor wrote: >> >>> We've standardized on XML for backend work. We aren't spending much time >>> debugging serialization issues and are pretty happy with our decision and >>> aren't likly to change any time soon > > Our choice, for "backend" work, as one example of an openstack customer. > >> vs. >> >>> So the obvious thing to do is support both JSON and XML, which isn't that >>> hard. > > A product feature choice as a platform provider who has to support a > community. > >> >> I'm always confused when people claim that doing something is easy, but >> also that for them to do the same thing is too hard. > > Our internal policy is actually that XML is mandatory and other formats are > allowed and driven by customer request. I never said it was too hard for us > to support both, and when we look at the needs of the community of developers > - we see a vastly different layout than openstack does, with a much smaller > set of people. BTW, we ironically followed the Rackspace Cloud architecture > team's recommendation as cloud is the only major external integrator with us. > > We just signed a major contract with a SaaS vendor whose product will become > one of the pillars that runs Rackspace. They earned big points in the > integration category vs their competition because they uniformly output XML, > JSON, CSV, XLS via http and SOAP for each API. > >>> at the point they try to tell me how to implement my solutions, all it does >>> is annoy me, because format wars are annoying. >> >> I'm not sure if you intended it, but dismissing a discussion about taking >> on a significant chunk of work as nothing more than an annoying "format war" >> sounds rather condescending. We're not arguing the merits of of one over the >> other; we're deciding if we are going to commit to supporting XML right now, >> or perhaps add it later on. > > Ask the customers. This is a product feature - the question is demand vs > difficulty. Think of this decision the same way we decide what OS's to > support. > > And several posts (none from you) have approached it by touting technical > merits. There are certain religious area: OS, language, xml vs json where > tech merit discussions are just going to result in endless soul sucking > debate. > >> Everyone would love to support as many formats as possible. With limited >> resources, we need to narrow our focus. And since this is all open source, >> anyone who has a need and finds implementing the solution for that need >> isn't "that hard" is more than welcome to contribute. > > I wonder what your stance would be on a contribution that was XML only. Mine > would be the same - the feature isn't ready for inclusion in a release until > it is finished by meeting the API standards of supporting both. > > I'm pushing for more involvement by our devs in openstack, btw. As we scratch > our own itches as customers i have no problem expecting our contributions to > meet openstack coding standards. But before this happens we go through the > process of deciding to deploy openstack components, and components that speak > XML are attractive to us. Other customers prefer JSON and I'd like a big tent > where we all collaborate. > >> >> -- Ed Leafe >> > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] Proposal for Brian Lamar to join Nova-Core
+1, although I'm concerned about what happens when he calls git blame. Is the blamar then the blamee, or blameless? Sorry, just had to get it out of my system. Joshua McKenty Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. (650) 283-6846 jos...@piston.cc On 2011-05-31, at 1:34 PM, Josh Kearney wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya > wrote: > > While I was checking branch merges, I noticed that Brian Lamar (blamar), is > > not listed as a nova-core developer. This is most definitely a travesty, > > as he has been one of the most prolific coders/reviewers over the past few > > months. So I'm proposing that he is added as a nova-core member. > > > > Vish > > ___ > > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] suggestion for data location compliance in swift
Well, since the pluggable ring idea *was* about this as well (I'm pretty sure, since I proposed it), maybe it's time to talk merkle trees ;) I'll circle back with notmyname and see what makes sense for breaking up this discussion into manageable chunks. Joshua McKenty Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. (650) 283-6846 jos...@piston.cc On 2011-05-31, at 9:08 AM, Michael Barton wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Rostyslav Slipetskyy > wrote: >> The idea to make ring implementation pluggable seems nice. >> At the same time I am thinking that many developers might not will feel >> comfortable with modifying existing ring structure, since it *works* >> :) Probably, the other viable option for allowing data location compliance >> is to implement it outside of ring file structure (but maybe inside the >> future Ring component/service). >> As an example I look at how replication works, "If a replicator detects that >> a remote drive is has failed, it will use the ring's “get_more_nodes” >> interface to choose an alternate node to synchronize with." It seems that >> "Ring#get_more_nodes" can be used in a similar manner to select alternative >> nodes in other zones for storing objects once some of the zones are banned >> for specific accounts. >> - Rostik > > Placement policies are (IMO) a replication problem more than a ring > problem. Well, there's a ring component, and it's a fair bit of work, > but it's sort of straightforward. The problem is that replication > decisions aren't made per object, they're made per partition or per > sub-partition, which can contain a lot of individual objects. > > So you'd need to break things up by replication policy in addition to > the groupings it already does, so like groups can be synced between > the right peers. Having several times as many groups to consider > could slow replication down quite a bit. That might prompt a > replication rethink (merkle trees?). All this has kept me scared > enough to stay away from it. > > I think the pluggable ring idea is more about having separate backends > fronted by a single Swift installation, and that's a whole other > discussion. > > -- Mike Barton > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] suggestion for data location compliance in swift
I think, from an audit and security standpoint, whatever component is responsible for the placement of data needs to be solely responsible, and needs to fail in a clean and transactional way. If the ring is modified to guarantee that the *first* copy of an object is written into a specific zone (to support a hybrid local/remote cloud, for instance), then I could see such an extension passing muster. However, in any given failure scenario, we still need to ensure that the data is limited to the appropriate zones, and I don't think that working around the existing ring architecture is going to achieve that. The goal of making the implementation pluggable was simply to take the existing methods, codify them somewhat, and then support alternate implementations of those methods. Not real-time pluggable or necessarily even exposed as a separate web service. I think, if you start looking at the intersection of location compliance, a hybrid of local and remote zones (LAN/WAN), and multiple tiers of storage hardware (SATA, SSD, etc) - patching rings and zones together feels a bit limited. I'd like to support an arbitrarily intelligent/policy-driven component. Of course, my use case is somewhat outside the "Service Provider Appropriate" mission statement of the core OpenStack project, hence the drive to support alternate ring components, rather than a proposal to make the existing one arbitrarily complex. As you point out, it *works*. Josh On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Rostyslav Slipetskyy wrote: > The idea to make ring implementation pluggable seems nice. > > At the same time I am thinking that many developers might not will feel > comfortable with modifying existing ring structure, since it *works* > :) Probably, the other viable option for allowing data location compliance > is to implement it *outside* of ring file structure (but maybe *inside*the > future Ring component/service). > > As an example I look at how replication works, "If a replicator detects > that a remote drive is has failed, it will use the ring's “get_more_nodes” > interface to choose an alternate node to synchronize with." It seems that > "Ring#get_more_nodes" can be used in a similar manner to select > alternative nodes in other zones for storing objects once some of the zones > are banned for specific accounts. > > - Rostik > > -- > *From:* Joshua McKenty > *To:* Rostyslav Slipetskyy > *Cc:* OpenStack > *Sent:* Tue, May 31, 2011 1:45:01 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] suggestion for data location compliance in > swift > > This was one of the use cases that drove the design discussion on > decoupling the swift ring implementation from the rest of swift (along with > supporting multiple tiers of hardware). See > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/swift/+spec/swift-pluggable-hashing-ring for > the basic proposal, however, and you'll note that we could definitely use > some additional developers :) > > Joshua > > > Joshua McKenty > Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. > (650) 283-6846 > jos...@piston.cc > > > > On 2011-05-30, at 4:18 PM, Rostyslav Slipetskyy wrote: > > Some of the data stored in the cloud has legal requirements to be stored > physically within certain geographical boundary (for example within a > country). > Currently OpenStack does not allow to impose restrictions on data location. > > It looks like zones can be very handy to achieve data location compliance > (according to the docs they can be used to group devices based on physical > location). For example, suppose that a provider has servers in USA (zones > 1-5) > and Canada (zones 6-10). Let's imagine that a customer has some legal > requirements to store its data on the servers in the USA. What I imagine > doing > is to restrict data for customer accounts to zones 1-5. > > Most probably, ring modifications will be necessary in order to implement > this. > > Best Regards, > Rostik > > _______ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > -- Joshua McKenty Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. (650) 283-6846 jos...@piston.cc ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] suggestion for data location compliance in swift
This was one of the use cases that drove the design discussion on decoupling the swift ring implementation from the rest of swift (along with supporting multiple tiers of hardware). See https://blueprints.launchpad.net/swift/+spec/swift-pluggable-hashing-ring for the basic proposal, however, and you'll note that we could definitely use some additional developers :) Joshua Joshua McKenty Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. (650) 283-6846 jos...@piston.cc On 2011-05-30, at 4:18 PM, Rostyslav Slipetskyy wrote: > Some of the data stored in the cloud has legal requirements to be stored > physically within certain geographical boundary (for example within a > country). > Currently OpenStack does not allow to impose restrictions on data location. > > It looks like zones can be very handy to achieve data location compliance > (according to the docs they can be used to group devices based on physical > location). For example, suppose that a provider has servers in USA (zones > 1-5) > and Canada (zones 6-10). Let's imagine that a customer has some legal > requirements to store its data on the servers in the USA. What I imagine > doing > is to restrict data for customer accounts to zones 1-5. > > Most probably, ring modifications will be necessary in order to implement > this. > > Best Regards, > Rostik > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] Starting an OpenStack web/docs meeting
Is there somewhere you could add an iCal feed of these meetings? (meetup.com or your own google account would work). I love me some iCal. Joshua McKenty Piston Cloud Computing, Inc. (650) 283-6846 jos...@piston.cc On 2011-05-27, at 9:29 AM, Anne Gentle wrote: > Hi all - > > Great refresh on both the openstack.org site by Todd Morey (wow, that was a > ton of work) and the front page of the wiki by Thierry. Way to go! > > I'm looking at all our web properties all the time and I am inspired to start > holding monthly meetings to gather contributors together, share information, > and to help people get to know the process around each web site. From the > main site to the wiki to each RST site to the docs site, they all serve a > common purpose and we want to make them helpful and useful and awesome. > > We'll use IRC and the meeting bot and the openstack-meeting channel to hold > these meetings. Now, to find a good time. Since we have contributors around > the world and I'd like to report to the dev meetings > on Tuesdays, I'd like to propose that we start with the first Monday of the > month, June 6, 2011 at 9:00 pm CST Monday evening (02:00 UTC). We'll just > meet monthly at first and adjust as needed. > > As a side note, I'm getting ready for the Open Help Conference in Cincinnati > June 3-5. If ever a conference was finely tuned to my needs, this one is it, > with talks about open source docs, open source support, and open source > certification programs all on the list. :) > > Hope to see you in #openstack-meeting for our first meeting. > > Thanks, > > Anne > Anne Gentle > a...@openstack.org > my blog | my book | LinkedIn | Delicious | Twitter > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] Welcome Our New Community Manager
Welcome, Stephen! Does that mean you're the one we talk to about the coffee supplies for the summit? Joshua On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Rick Clark wrote: > Stackers (in case you haven't noticed that is what we are calling > ourselves, it is a play off of rackers, the internal name for Rackspace > employees), > > By now most of you we have a new Community Manager, Stephen Specter. > Stephen was the Xen.org Community Manager before joining us. So he has > a very apropos background, and many of you may already know him. > > > http://openstack.org/blog/2010/09/community-manager-introduction/ > > He will be working hard planning our upcoming design summit. Please > give him a hardy welcome. I'm sure we will be hearing from him a lot. > > > Rick Clark > > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Openstack] openstack issues from Japan
The next step is definitely to write up blueprints of these planned features (something that I am long overdue to contribute as well). I believe we have already had some discussions with RedHat about getting Fedora Core packages of OpenStack made, I can follow up on this. We will publish a more complete feature list for Austin by the 3rd (e.g., today!) by completing the missing blueprints. Joshua On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Masanori ITOH wrote: > Hello, > > I'm Masanori Itoh of NTT DATA, Japan. > > I would like to share some issues on openstack from Japanese > enterprise system market. > > I know that the requirements below do not fit for the austin release > scheduled in this Octorber, but I believe that still it's useful > sharing them with folks here. > > > Issue 1. Live Migration support (strong) > > From a view point of operating private clouds which host enterprise > systems, Live Migration is almost mandatory. > > Now, we are doing feasibility study to explore if we can do and > contribute that. > > Issue 2. RPM packages (medium) > > In Japanese business market, RPM based distributions such as RHEL are > dominant. So, we would like to have RPM packages too in addition to > deb packages. > As for the initial target distribution, Fedora 13 would be appropriate > I think, and I guess that it's possible we contribute somehow from > this point too. > > Issue 3. Feature list of the austin release > > My boss asked me if there is a detailed list of features > covered by the austin release. > For example, the list is preferable to have coverage list of > the Amazon API and Rackspace API which Nova supports. > > Is there that kind of list? > # I'm afraid no... :( > > > BTW, cloud anyone tell me what I should do next? > > - Opening blueprint pages? > > - Joining the next release IRC? > - Please understand that the weekly release meeting is 5:00AM of Saturday >in Japan unfortunatelly ... :( > > Thanks in advance, > Masanori > > --- > Masanori ITOH R&D Headquarters, NTT DATA CORPORATION > e-mail: itou...@nttdata.co.jp > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
