Ravi,
It seems that the following Blueprint
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprint-aws-vpc-support
has been approved.
However, I cannot find a discussion with regard to the merit of using project
vs. domain, or other mechanism for the implementation.
I have an issue with this approach as
There is a Blueprint targeted for Icehouse-3 that is aiming to implement the
AWS VPC api. I don't think that this blueprint is providing the necessary
constructs to really implement a VPC, and it is not taking into account the
domains, or proposed multi tenant hierarchy. In addition, I could
,
I have proposed BP to address VPC using domain hierarchy and hierarchical
administrative boundary.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/hierarchical-administrative-boundary
Thanks,
Arvind
-Original Message-
From: Martin, JC [mailto:jch.mar...@gmail.com]
Sent
On Feb 14, 2014, at 11:42 AM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
There is a Blueprint targeted for Icehouse-3 that is aiming to implement the
AWS VPC api. I don't think that this blueprint is providing
to have one VPC
to one project mapping. As your blueprint matures we will
move VPC to multiple project mapping.
We feel that instead of throwing away all the work done we can take an
incremental approach.
Regards,
Rudra
On Feb 14, 2014, at 11:09 AM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote
can
maintain API compatibility to AWS API that we are proposing. As we are
subset of your proposal and don't expose all features within VPC.
Regards
-Harshad
On Feb 14, 2014, at 6:22 PM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
Rudra,
I do not agree that the current proposal provides
admin.
Regards
-Harshad
On Feb 14, 2014, at 10:07 PM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
Harshad,
I'm not sure to understand what you mean by :
However many of these concepts are not exposed to a AWS customers and
the API work well.
So for example in :
http
Harshad,
I tried to find some discussion around this blueprint.
Could you provide us with some notes or threads ?
Also, about the code review you mention. which one are you talking about :
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/40071/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/49470/
://review.openstack.org/#/c/53171
This review is not active. It was accidentally submitted with a new
change-id.
Regards,
Rudra
On 2/16/14, 9:25 AM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
Harshad,
I tried to find some discussion around this blueprint.
Could you provide us with some notes
I see a lot of good things happening on the hierarchical multi tenancy proposal
that Vish made a while back.
However, the focus so far is on roles and quota but could not find any
discussion related to resource ownership.
Is the plan to allow the creation of resources within any level of the
Joe,
See my comments in line.
On Feb 18, 2014, at 12:26 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
There was a lot of emails on that thread, but I am not seeing the discussion
converging. I would like to reiterate my
Vish,
See comments below.
JC
On Feb 18, 2014, at 12:19 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya vishvana...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 18, 2014, at 11:31 AM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
I see a lot of good things happening on the hierarchical multi tenancy
proposal that Vish made a while back
Comments in line.
JC
On Feb 18, 2014, at 5:21 PM, Rudra Rugge rru...@juniper.net wrote:
Please see inline:
On Feb 18, 2014, at 2:57 PM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe I should explain this one a bit.
Shared network: If a user has defined a shared network, and they used
Hi,
There was some discussion a while back around the VPC implementation in
Openstack. There is a proposal to implement the AWS VPC features in Nova EC2
APIs, but this makes sense for the EC2 compatible API only and may not be
appropriate for an Openstack specify one.
I would like to know
14 matches
Mail list logo
