Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][neutron] bonding?
Hi Jim, Neutron is supporting resource tagging [1] which is support currently network resource_type With a simple change is neutron you can also allow resource tagging for port resource_type [2] This will allow you to tags ports and indicate that they are in the same group maybe that can work better the ironic port group concept. [1] - https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/kilo/approved/tag-instances.html [2] - https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/neutron/extensions/tag.py#L38-L41 From: Armando M. [mailto:arma...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 10:19 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][neutron] bonding? On 24 May 2016 at 04:51, Jim Rollenhagen <j...@jimrollenhagen.com<mailto:j...@jimrollenhagen.com>> wrote: Hi, There's rumors floating around about Neutron having a bonding model in the near future. Are there any solid plans for that? Who spreads these rumors :)? To the best of my knowledge I have not seen any RFE proposed recently along these lines. For context, as part of the multitenant networking work, ironic has a portgroup concept proposed, where operators can configure bonding for NICs in a baremetal machine. There are ML2 drivers that support this model and will configure a bond. Some folks have concerns about landing this code if Neutron is going to support bonding as a first-class citizen. So before we delay any further, I'd like to find out if there's any truth to this, and what the timeline for that might look like. Thanks! // jim __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][neutron] bonding?
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:18:40PM -0700, Armando M. wrote: > On 24 May 2016 at 04:51, Jim Rollenhagenwrote: > > > Hi, > > > > There's rumors floating around about Neutron having a bonding model in > > the near future. Are there any solid plans for that? > > > > Who spreads these rumors :)? > > To the best of my knowledge I have not seen any RFE proposed recently along > these lines. Thanks Armando. Long live portgroups :) // jim > > > > For context, as part of the multitenant networking work, ironic has a > > portgroup concept proposed, where operators can configure bonding for > > NICs in a baremetal machine. There are ML2 drivers that support this > > model and will configure a bond. > > > > Some folks have concerns about landing this code if Neutron is going to > > support bonding as a first-class citizen. So before we delay any > > further, I'd like to find out if there's any truth to this, and what the > > timeline for that might look like. > > > > Thanks! > > > > // jim > > > > __ > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][neutron] bonding?
Excerpts from Jim Rollenhagen's message of 2016-05-24 07:51:21 -0400: > Hi, > > There's rumors floating around about Neutron having a bonding model in > the near future. Are there any solid plans for that? > > For context, as part of the multitenant networking work, ironic has a > portgroup concept proposed, where operators can configure bonding for > NICs in a baremetal machine. There are ML2 drivers that support this > model and will configure a bond. > > Some folks have concerns about landing this code if Neutron is going to > support bonding as a first-class citizen. So before we delay any > further, I'd like to find out if there's any truth to this, and what the > timeline for that might look like. > FYI we've been playing with bonding and Ironic using Bifrost and glean. There are some patches up for the format we've used: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/318940/ Just a thought, it would be good if we can get that metadata to be the same for Neutron, or at least get an early idea of the spec so we can make sure glean supports it ASAP. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][neutron] bonding?
The only thing I am remotely aware of that is relevant is: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1558626 But that's really just in one agent. -- Sean M. Collins __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][neutron] bonding?
On 24 May 2016 at 04:51, Jim Rollenhagenwrote: > Hi, > > There's rumors floating around about Neutron having a bonding model in > the near future. Are there any solid plans for that? > Who spreads these rumors :)? To the best of my knowledge I have not seen any RFE proposed recently along these lines. > For context, as part of the multitenant networking work, ironic has a > portgroup concept proposed, where operators can configure bonding for > NICs in a baremetal machine. There are ML2 drivers that support this > model and will configure a bond. > > Some folks have concerns about landing this code if Neutron is going to > support bonding as a first-class citizen. So before we delay any > further, I'd like to find out if there's any truth to this, and what the > timeline for that might look like. > > Thanks! > > // jim > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [ironic][neutron] bonding?
Hi, There's rumors floating around about Neutron having a bonding model in the near future. Are there any solid plans for that? For context, as part of the multitenant networking work, ironic has a portgroup concept proposed, where operators can configure bonding for NICs in a baremetal machine. There are ML2 drivers that support this model and will configure a bond. Some folks have concerns about landing this code if Neutron is going to support bonding as a first-class citizen. So before we delay any further, I'd like to find out if there's any truth to this, and what the timeline for that might look like. Thanks! // jim __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev