Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][L3] BGP Dynamic Routing Proposal

Hi everyone, Sorry, I couldn't make it in time for the IRC meeting. Just saw in the logs: 15:19:12 yamamoto are orange folks here? they might want to introduce their bgp speaker. The best intro to BaGPipe BGP is the README on github:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][L3] BGP Dynamic Routing Proposal

VPN is used (eg. between virtual networks, or to/from an external IP VPN), traffic is carried as IP traffic in MPLS or MPLS-GRE. Help me understand the deployment model for this . Hope that helps, -Thomas -Original Message- From: Thomas Morin [mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com] Sent

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][L3] BGP Dynamic Routing Proposal

VPN is used (eg. between virtual networks, or to/from an external IP VPN), traffic is carried as IP traffic in MPLS or MPLS-GRE. Help me understand the deployment model for this . Hope that helps, -Thomas -Original Message- From: Thomas Morin [mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com] Sent

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][L3] BGP Dynamic Routing Proposal

Hi Ian, Ian Wells : When you say things like 'tenant = VRF' (and, in fact, I presume you mean 'network = VRF', since networks and tenants are two different things) then that's actually more to do with how you implement the networking overlay layer in Neutron. While interesting, and while

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] [RFC] Floating IP idea solicitation and collaboration

Hi Keshava, 2014-12-15 11:52, A, Keshava : I have been thinking of Starting MPLS right from CN for L2VPN/EVPN scenario also. Below are my queries w.r.t supporting MPLS from OVS : 1. MPLS will be used even for VM-VM traffic across CNs generated by OVS ? If

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] [RFC] Floating IP idea solicitation and collaboration

Hi Ryan, Mathieu Rohon : We have been working on similar Use cases to announce /32 with the Bagpipe BGPSpeaker that supports EVPN. Btw, the code for the BGP E-VPN implementation is at https://github.com/Orange-OpenSource/bagpipe-bgp It reuses parts of ExaBGP (to which we contributed

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

Doug Wiegley : As an alternative, to be considered to cleaned up, note that octavia, also a neutron stadium project, puts its specs in its own repo, runs its own doc jobs, etc. Pros and cons, but just pointing out that its out there. Same for networking-bgpvpn: while the base discussion on

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] How could an L2 agent extension access agent methods ?

Hi Ihar, Ihar Hrachyshka : Reviving the thread. [...] (I appreciate if someone checks me on the following though): This is an excellent recap. I set up a new etherpad to collect feedback from subprojects [2]. I've filled in details for networking-bgpvpn. Please tell me if you need more

[openstack-dev] [tc][infra][neutron] branches for release-independent projects targeting Openstack release X

Hi everyone, The starting point for this post is a specific Neutron sub-project (networking-bgpvpn) but I believe the issues raised are shared with other neutron stadium project and possibly relevant beyond Neutron, to projects tagged release-independent in general. In the context of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][neutron] branches for release-independent projects targeting Openstack release X

Hi Neil, Neil Jerram : [snip] I've since realised that my initial statement above wasn't quite right. In fact, because networking-calico uses Neutron interfaces that are pretty stable (ML2 mech driver, DHCP interface driver, etc.) we have found it manageable until now to develop a single

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][neutron] branches for release-independent projects targeting Openstack release X

Hi Thierry, Thanks for you answers, more below. Thierry Carrez : Thomas Morin wrote: The starting point for this post is a specific Neutron sub-project (networking-bgpvpn) but I believe the issues raised are shared with other neutron stadium project and possibly relevant beyond Neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Social at the summit

+1 ! Mon Apr 25 2016 10:55:33 GMT-0500 (CDT), Kyle Mestery: Ihar, Henry and I were talking and we thought Thursday night makes sense for a Neutron social in Austin. If others agree, reply on this thread and we'll find a place. Thanks! Kyle

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [stadium] subprojects on independent release cycle

Hi Armando, As far as networking-bgpvpn and networking-bagpipe are concerned, the plan is to do like we've been doing for the past 2 releases, which is to cut a branch and make a release not too far after Openstack. The date of March 10th looks reasonable as a target, and we'll stick to that.

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Enable arp_responder without l2pop

Hi Anil, Tue Feb 21 2017 22:47:46 GMT-0500 (EST), Anil Venkata: Currently arp_resonder can enabled only if l2pop is enabled. Can we have arp_responder feature enabled without l2pop(i.e Remove the dependency between arp_responder and l2_pop)? I agree that it would be useful.

[openstack-dev] [infra] merging code from a github repo to an openstack existing repo: how ?

Hi, A bit of context to make my question clearer: openstack/networking-bagpipe relies on bagpipe-bgp which is not an openstack project although done by the same people, and we would see a significant benefit in moving the code from github to openstack. This post does not relate to

[openstack-dev] [neutron] br-int to use registers instead of ovsdb tags (was: Re: Enable arp_responder without l2pop)

Wed Feb 22 2017 11:13:18 GMT-0500 (EST), Anil Venkata: While relevant, I think this is not possible until br-int allows to match the network a packet belongs to (the ovsdb port tags don't let you do that until the packet leaves br-int with a NORMAL action). Ajo has told me yesterday

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - Neutron team social in Atlanta on Thursday

+1 ! -Thomas Fri Feb 17 2017 20:18:41 GMT+0100 (CET), Kevin Benton: Hi all, I'm organizing a Neutron social event for Thursday evening in Atlanta somewhere near the venue for dinner/drinks. If you're interested, please reply to this email with a "+1" so I can get a general count for a

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] neutron-classifier (CCF) at the PTG

Hi, I have no opinion on where/when this should happen, but will be interested to participate. -Thomas Tue Feb 14 2017 15:39:22 GMT+0100 (CET), Duarte Cardoso, Igor: Hi neutron, Me and David would like to discuss the Common Classification Framework (CCF) (current approach based on

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - approximate schedule for PTG / networking-bgpvpn

Hi everyone, I propose to meet and discuss networking-bgpvpn tomorrow (Wed) after the Neutron session. Current and future contributors to the service plugin or to drivers are welcome! -Thomas Sat Feb 18 2017 15:42:24 GMT-0500 (EST), Kevin Benton: Hi All, Here is a rough outline of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - approximate schedule for PTG

Hi Kevin, all, A few things: - I think it would be useful to discuss the work for L2 extension ovs flow management [1] on Thursday aft. - I'm ready to expose where we are on n8g-bgpvpn on Friday morning - If time allows, it would be great to take some time to discuss/encourage the adoption of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Neutron team social event in Barcelona

Hi Miguel, I plan to attend! -Thomas Fri Oct 14 2016 20:30:57 GMT+0200 (CEST), Miguel Lavalle: Dear Neutrinos, I am organizing a social event for the team on Thursday 27th at 19:30. After doing some Google research, I am proposing Raco de la Vila, which is located in Poblenou:

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron]Do we need to rfe to implement active-active router?

Hi, What would active-active exactly be in DVR mode ? -Thomas Le 16/11/2016 à 16:42, huangdenghui a écrit : hi Currently, neutron support DVR router and legacy router. For high availability, there is HA router in reference implementation of legacy mode and DVR mode. I am considering

[openstack-dev] [neutron][n8n-bgpvpn] meeting on BGP VPN in Barcelona: Fri 1pm

Hi folks, For those who are interested to discuss networking-bgpvpn Ocata, I propose that we meet tomorrow at 1pm in the Contributors' meetup room (CCIB 114). Among the things we can discuss: - pending things related to neutron stadium - ^ in particular, CI testing - what API evolutions to

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][horizon][fwaas][vpnaas] fwaas/vpnaas dashboard split out

Hi Akihiro, While I understand the motivation to move these dashboards from openstack/horizon, what is the reason to prefer a distinct repo for the dashboard rather than hosting it in the main repo of these projects ? (networking-bgpvpn has had a dashboard for some time already, it is

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][horizon][fwaas][vpnaas] fwaas/vpnaas dashboard split out

explored), should we move to the model agreed on for new work (given that there is also overhead in creating and maintaining a new repo) ? Best, -Thomas On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:33 AM, Thomas Morin <thomas.mo...@orange.com <mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com>> wrote: Hi Akihiro, Whi

[openstack-dev] Re : [Neutron] Denver Team Dinner

+1 -Thomas Takashi Yamamoto, 2017-09-13 03:05: > +1 > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:56 AM, IWAMOTO Toshihiro > wrote: > > +1 > > thanks for organizing! > > > > On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:18:45 +0900, > > Brian Haley wrote: > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On 09/12/2017 10:44 PM,

[openstack-dev] [neutron] New core on networking-bgpvpn

Hi everyone, Let me welcome Édouard Thuleau (doude) as a new core on networking-bgpvpn! Édouard has been following and contributing from the early days, in particular on the framework and on the API client. He knows the project well and has done multiple reviews. He also knows about the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Stepping down from core

Sad to hear. You brought a lot to the community in particular in helping the Neutron Stadium take shape. Thank you for that and all the rest! Hoping you'll keep contributing as actively as possible, -Thomas Armando M., 2017-12-15 11:01: > Hi neutrinos, > > To some of you this email may not

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][kolla] new requirements change on upper-constraints.txt break horizon & neutron

This is related to the topic in "[horizon][neutron] tools/tox_install changes - breakage with constraints". proposes to remove these projects from upper-constraints (for a different reason)https://review.openstack.org/#/c/552865 that adds other projects to global-requirements, explicitly postpone

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Dublin PTG Summary

Miguel Lavalle, 2018-03-12 13:45: > * Ruijing Guo proposed to support VLAN transparency in Neutron OVS > agent. > > [...] - While on this topic, the conversation temporarily forked to > the use of registers instead of ovsdb port tags in L2 agent br-int > and possibly remove br

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon][neutron] tools/tox_install changes - breakage with constraints

Hi Andreas, all, > Note that thanks to the tox-siblings feature, we really continue to > install neutron and horizon from git - and not use the versions in > the global-requirements constraints file. This addresses my main concern, which was that by removing tools/tox_install.sh we would end up

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon][neutron] tools/tox_install changes - breakage with constraints

Hi Doug, Doug Hellmann, 2018-03-14 23:42: > We keep doing lots of infra-related work to make it "easy" to do > when it comes to > managing dependencies. There are three ways to address the issue > with horizon and neutron, and none of them involve adding features > to pbr. > > 1. Things that

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][neutron] Depending on pypi versions

Hi Gary, Seehttp://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-March/128311 .html > Note that thanks to the tox-siblings feature, we really continue to> install neutron and horizon from git - and not use the versions in> the global-requirements constraints file, Gary Kotton, 2018-03-19 11:25:

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][kolla] new requirements change on upper-constraints.txt break horizon & neutron

ing to try this component on top of an existing installation, assuming they follow a few extra steps explained in the rest of the doc. Adding networing-bgpvpn to upper-constraints.txt will break this way of doing things. -Thomas Andreas Jaeger, 2018-03-16 11:53: > On 2018-03-16 11:42, Thoma

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][stable] Stable Core Team Update

+1 ! -Thomas On 10/2/18 5:41 PM, Miguel Lavalle wrote: Hi Stable Team, I want to nominate Bernard Cafarrelli as a stable core reviewer for Neutron and related projects. Bernard has been increasing the number of stable reviews he is doing for the project [1]. Besides that, he is a stable

Re: [openstack-dev] [networking-odl][networking-bgpvpn][ceilometer] all requirement updates are currently blocked

Hi Mathew, Matthew Thode, 2018-08-31 19:52: > The requirements project has a co-installability test for the various > projects, networking-odl being included. > > Because of the way the dependancy on ceilometer is done it is > blocking all reviews and updates to the requirements project. (also

Re: [openstack-dev] [networking-odl][networking-bgpvpn][ceilometer] all requirement updates are currently blocked

Thomas Morin, 2018-09-03 13:31: > Matthew Thode, 2018-08-31 19:52: > > > > If networking-odl is not meant to be used as a library I'd > > recommend > > it's removal from networking-bgpvpn (it's test-requirements.txt > > file). > > We can work at removing