-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
to vote, can you clarify?
Edgar
From: Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com
Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 at 1:11 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions
list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin
@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
. This
allows vendor control over most of their bits, removes the constant
churn for simple bug fixes in the neutron tree, and adds the benefit
of being a part of the simultaneous release, which is the only thing
most vendors care about.
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Kevin Benton blak
@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
I'm not sure what the guideline is, but I would like to point out a good
reason to have the bug report even for obvious fixes.
When users encounters bugs, they go to launchpad to report them. They don't
first scan the commits of the master branch to see what was fixed. Having
the bug in launchpad
Is the pylint static analysis that caught that error prone to false
positives? If not, I agree that it would be really nice if that were made
part of the tox check so these don't have to be fixed after the fact.
To me that particular patch seems like one that should be accompanied with
a unit
?
--
Sean M. Collins
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
Although just swapping the times defeats the whole purpose for people that
attend both meetings. :-)
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Collins, Sean
sean_colli...@cable.comcast.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 03:28:34PM EDT, Kevin Benton wrote:
Maybe the ipv6 subteam meeting could
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi
correct any dependencies on the
RouterInterface. I understand the error I’m getting, but I’m not sure if
I’m doing something wrong or if it’s a bug.
*From:* Kevin Benton [mailto:blak...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, August 13, 2014 10:44 PM
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List
to the
Development policies doc.
Mark.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing
the
optimization to not actually sort the whole list if you just need the first
of the largest two elements.
The former is analogous to the security groups API, and the latter to the
GBP API.
On Aug 7, 2014 4:00 PM, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Kevin Benton blak
The existing constructs will not change.
On Aug 8, 2014 9:49 AM, CARVER, PAUL pc2...@att.com wrote:
Wuhongning [mailto:wuhongn...@huawei.com] wrote:
Does it make sense to move all advanced extension out of ML2, like
security
group, qos...? Then we can just talk about advanced service itself,
at 6:28 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/08/2014 08:55 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
The existing constructs will not change.
A followup question on the above...
If GPB API is merged into Neutron, the next logical steps (from what I
can tell) will be to add drivers that handle policy
/
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman
constraints would result in a 403.
On Aug 8, 2014 1:04 PM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Aug 8, 2014, at 10:56 AM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
There is an enforcement component to the group policy that allows you to
use the current APIs and it's the reason that group policy
wrote:
On 8 August 2014 10:56, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
There is an enforcement component to the group policy that allows you to
use the current APIs and it's the reason that group policy is integrated
into the neutron project. If someone uses the current APIs, the group
policy
, and eth2 connected
to the storage network (or some other permutation.)
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
trying to convince you of the value of declarative
network configuration.
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
You said you had no idea what group based policy was buying us so I tried
that communication
between these two hosts can be prevented by using an ACL on a router or a
switch, which doesn't violate the user's intent and buys a performance
improvement and works with ports that don't support security groups.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi
, Kevin Benton wrote:
That makes sense. It's not quite a fair analogy though to compare to
reintroducing projects or tenants because Keystone endpoints aren't
'user-facing' so to speak. i.e. a regular user (application deployer,
instance operator, etc) should never have to see or understand
, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any parity features you are aware of that aren't receiving
adequate developer/reviewer time? I'm not aware of any parity features that
are in a place where throwing more engineers at them is going to speed
anything up. Maybe Mark
'template'
since this was clearly already in use by Horizon?
On Aug 6, 2014 9:24 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/06/2014 02:12 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
Given that, pointing to the Nova parity work seems a bit like a red
herring. This new API is being developed orthogonally to the existing
Hi Aaron,
These are good questions, but can we move this to a different thread
labeled what is the point of group policy?
I don't want to derail this one again and we should stick to Salvatore's
options about the way to move forward with these code changes.
On Aug 6, 2014 12:42 PM, Aaron Rosen
I believe the referential security group rules solve this problem (unless
I'm not understanding):
I think the disconnect is that you are comparing the way to current mapping
driver implements things for the reference implementation with the existing
APIs. Under this light, it's not going to look
://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe the referential security group rules solve this problem (unless
I'm not understanding):
I think the disconnect is that you are comparing the way to current
mapping
driver implements things for the reference
). Otherwise, these kinds of conversations are
likely to continue.
Best,
-jay
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe the referential security group rules solve this problem
(unless I'm not understanding):
I think the disconnect is that you are comparing the way to current
mapping driver
.
Armando
On 6 August 2014 15:03, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe the referential security group rules solve this problem
(unless I'm not understanding):
I think the disconnect is that you are comparing
addresses. If
you tried to enforce this at the router you would be violating that
specification because devices in the same subnet would be able to
communicate on those blocked ports.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Kevin Benton
of the security group.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
Given this information I don't see any reason why the backend system
couldn't do enforcement at the logical router
.
Best,
-jay
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
I prefer merged because moving it to a separate project blocks it from
enforcing policy on the current API (including calls between service
plugins).
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Armando M. arma...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 August 2014 15:47, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we
with the security groups API, you are forcing it to be
implemented there.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
That's the point. By using security groups, you are forcing a certain
kind
.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev
with a pointer to the file, the section name, the
key, and the value with a notification to restart the service.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
Web tier can communicate with anything
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
at 12:24 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com
mailto:blak...@gmail.com wrote:
Specifying an endpoint group would achieve the
--networking-template effects
you described. The endpoint group would have all of the security
policies,
IP allocation policies, connectivity
endpoint.
On Aug 5, 2014 3:53 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/05/2014 05:22 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
Is anyone listening to what I'm saying? The term endpoint is obtuse
and completely disregards the existing denotation of the word endpoint
in use in OpenStack today.
Sorry, I
projects like serivcevm server or nova.
thnaks,
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 12:14:54AM -0700,
Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
That makes sense. Shouldn't we wait for something to require it before
adding it though?
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:41 PM, joehuang joehu...@huawei.com wrote
It seems like this is precisely what the functional test setup was designed
to handle. Is there a reason you don't want to run them as functional tests
instead of unit tests?
As functional tests, nobody would need new prereqs just to make it through
unit tests and anyone that wants to do the full
GBP work. If that's
the case, it could be contained in the CLI or possibly introduced in
another extension if it requires too much complexity in the client.
Cheers,
--
Kevin Benton
On Jul 30, 2014 12:25 PM, Mandeep Dhami dh...@noironetworks.com wrote:
Hi Ryan:
As I stated in the patch review
...
The compare and update strategy is for avoiding the use of SELECT FOR
UPDATE.
Best,
-jay
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin
, Kevin Benton wrote:
i.e. 'optimistic locking' as opposed to the 'pessimistic locking'
referenced in the 3rd link of the email starting the thread.
No, there's no locking.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com
mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/30/2014 09:48
will fail if another user updates the record
first.
Did I misinterpret how your approach works?
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/30/2014 10:53 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
Using the UPDATE WHERE statement you described is referred to as
optimistic locking. [1
in the SQL engine internals where they belong. :-)
On Jul 30, 2014 2:00 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/30/2014 12:21 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
Maybe I misunderstood your approach then.
I though you were suggesting where a node performs an UPDATE record
WHERE record = last_state_node_saw
.
As an alternative, could you try configuring your router with the static
route so that it would send an icmp redirect to the neutron router?
Carl
On Jul 22, 2014 11:23 AM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
The issue (if I understand your diagram correctly) is that the VPN GW
address
be required.
Is exposing that ref in a known format/location something the infra team
might consider?
Thanks
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2014-07-21 11:36:43 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote:
I see. So then back to my other question
.
Cheers
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
router.
--
Kevin Benton
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Ricardo Carrillo Cruz
ricardo.carrillo.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello guys
I have the following network setup at home:
[openstack instances] - [neutron router] - [ [home router] [vpn gw] ]
TENANT NETWORK
(other than the logs of course) could be used in
a third-party system?
Thanks
1.
http://logs.openstack.org/64/83664/17/check/gate-neutron-python27/db29f20/console.html.gz
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2014-07-13 00:09:11 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton
by using the
token.
If the underlying agent or plugin wants to use the token, then the
requirement will be asked by somebody.
BR
Joe
--
*发件人:* Kevin Benton [blak...@gmail.com]
*发送时间:* 2014年7月19日 4:23
*收件人:* OpenStack Development Mailing List
://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
...@rackspace.com wrote:
It was for more of a potential use to query another service. Don't think
well go this route though, but was curious why it was one of the only
values not populated even though there's a field for it.
From: Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com
Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing
While the long term fix is a bump up in the requirements, a workaround
suggested for the 3rd party CI systems is to force an upgrade of alembic
before running devstack. This will allow the setup to work so that patch
isn't a high priority.
--
Kevin Benton
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Kyle
@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
This bug is also affecting Ryu and the Big Switch CI.
There is a patch to bump the version requirement for alembic linked in the
bug report that should fix it. It we can't get that merged we may have to
revert the healing patch.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1342507
On Jul 16, 2014 9:27 AM,
:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Reviving the old thread.
On 17/06/14 11:23, Kevin Benton wrote:
Hi Ihar,
What is the reason to breakup neutron into so many packages? A
quick disk usage stat shows the plugins directory is currently
3.4M. Is that considered to be too
We might as well note here on the list that the entire QoS extension has
been pushed out to K so there definitely isn't a reason for a meeting now.
:-)
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 02:15:58AM EDT, Kevin Benton wrote:
I think at this point the discussion is mostly contained in the review for
the spec
PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
Are these zuul refs publicly accessible so that the third party CI
systems could reference then to guarantee they are testing the same thing?
Well, if you aren't using Zuul to handle the merging of dependent
patchsets, I'm not entirely sure the ZUUL_ environment
If I understand correctly, you are having it comment when there is a
retrigger due to an internal CI failure? If so, please don't do this
because it makes the Gerrit reviews very noisy and it provides nothing
relevant to the contributor submitting the patch.
Nobody wants a CI to report that it
For log storage I would definitely start with compression since these are
just plain text. Make sure you enable gzip decompression in your web server
software so people can still view the log files in their browser.
Before spending tons of disk space on log storage, I would also have it
purge
://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
07, 2014 at 11:01:52PM PDT, Kevin Benton wrote:
I can lead it, but I'm not sure if there is anything new to discuss since
the QoS spec is still under review.
Did you have any specific agenda items that you wanted to cover?
Ah. The QoS IRC meeting will also need to be chaired in my absence
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
it
will just test the patch without merging it.
Where is this merging process handled in the OpenStack CI? Is that done in
Zuul with the custom Zuul branch is passed to devstack?
--
Kevin Benton
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2014-07-01 10:05:45 -0700 (-0700
-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Maybe we can require period checks against the head of the master
branch (which should always pass) and build statistics based on the results
of that. Otherwise it seems like we have to take a CI system's word for it
that a particular patch indeed broke that system.
--
Kevin Benton
On Thu, Jul
Are these zuul refs publicly accessible so that the third party CI systems
could reference then to guarantee they are testing the same thing?
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/03/2014 02:10 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
The reason I thought it changed
Yes, I can propose a spec for that. It probably won't be until Monday.
Is that okay?
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Anita Kuno ante...@anteaya.info wrote:
On 07/03/2014 02:33 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
Maybe we can require period checks against the head of the master
branch (which should
this to the mailing list
to get feedback.
1. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronThirdPartyTesting
Cheers
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
would be acceptable to the community?
1.
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/third_party/2014/third_party.2014-06-30-18.01.html
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin
as the 'with' statement for the transaction so it will be
closed at that point.
Cheers,
Kevin Benton
--
Kevin Benton
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Li Ma skywalker.n...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm developing a new mechanism driver. I'd like to access ml2-related
tables in create_port_precommit
demonstrating what you are trying to do.
--
Kevin Benton
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 3:21 AM, Li Ma skywalker.n...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for your reply. Actually, it is not that straightforward.
Even if postcommit is outside the 'with' statement, the transaction is not
'truly' committed
and
writing ml2-related tables) in postcommit, db lock wait exception is still
thrown.
Li Ma
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: 星期三, 2014年 6 月 25日 下午 4:59
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: 星期四, 2014年 6 月 26日 上午 10:32:47
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron ML2] Potential DB lock when
developing new mechanism driver
This sounds like a good idea to handle some of the performance issues until
the ovs firewall can be implemented down the the line.
Do you have any performance comparisons?
On Jun 18, 2014 7:46 PM, shihanzhang ayshihanzh...@126.com wrote:
Hello all,
Now in neutron, it use iptable implementing
Hi Ihar,
What is the reason to breakup neutron into so many packages? A quick disk
usage stat shows the plugins directory is currently 3.4M.
Is that considered to be too much space for a package, or was it for
another reason?
Thanks,
Kevin Benton
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Ihar
ML2
driver with just ML2 installed because the Big Switch plugin directory is
gone.
Is there somewhere where we can put common third party code that will be
safe from removal during packaging?
Thanks
--
Kevin Benton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
be a high priority and I suspect
other packagers could end up doing the same thing.
That's why I was looking for an alternative approach.
--
Kevin Benton
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 17/06/14 00
This approach would work but my only concern is then getting an external
package added as a dependency to Neutron.
Or would you just forgo that entirely and mock out all of the library calls?
--
Kevin Benton
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Salvatore Orlando sorla...@nicira.com
wrote:
I think
That could be a possible workaround.
In this particular deployment the nodes no longer had access to the
Internet though to install additional packages.
--
Kevin Benton
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Armando M. arma...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe the Brocade's mech driver might have the same
manner that exclude a ton of possibilities, we shouldn't have to worry
about rainbow tables.
--
Kevin Benton
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:52 AM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
On 12 June 2014 23:59, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
The only thing it makes harder is you have
neutron DB.
Could you elaborate a little more on what types of code should be stripped
out of drivers and moved to agents?
--
Kevin Benton
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:17 AM, henry hly henry4...@gmail.com wrote:
ML2 mechanism drivers are becoming another kind of plugins. Although
they can be loaded
This mailing list is dedicated to openstack development.
I would try your question on https://ask.openstack.org/or the general list
mentioned here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists#General_List
Cheers,
Kevin Benton
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:11 PM, Sachi Gupta sachi.gu...@tcs.com
that it gets retested every time a patch ahead of it in the queue fails.
--
Kevin Benton
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:07 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
You may all have noticed things are really backed up in the gate right
now, and you would be correct. (Top of gate is about 30 hrs
better than 80% in one run and my point is moot, but I
have several patches waiting to be merged that haven't made it through
after ~3 tries each.
Cheers,
Kevin Benton
1. http://paste.openstack.org/show/83039/
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu
So if I'm understanding you correctly, a job can fail and will be held onto
in case one of the parent jobs causes a reset in which case it will be
retested?
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2014-06-05 19:50:30 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote
that, but it's definitely
something to consider.
--
Kevin Benton
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Nachi Ueno na...@ntti3.com wrote:
Hi folks
Today, we are can change allow overlapping ips or not by configuration.
This has impact of database design, and actually, this flag complicate the
implementations
701 - 800 of 830 matches
Mail list logo
