Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-08 Thread Maru Newby
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 is integrated into the neutron project. If someone uses the current APIs, the group policy

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-08 Thread Kevin Benton
The only issue with the separate service proxying API calls is that it can't receive requests between the service and core plugins. What kind of stability requirements were you concerned about? A response change would be similar to having a custom policy.json file where things that violate

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Kevin Benton
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 McClain (Nova parity leader) can provide some better

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Gary Kotton
On 8/5/14, 8:53 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 01:23 PM, Gary Kotton wrote: Ok, thanks for the clarification. This means that it will not be done automagically as it is today ­ the tenant will need to create a Neutron port and then pass that through. FWIW, that's

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Gary Kotton
-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Aaron Rosen
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote: On 8/5/14, 8:53 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 01:23 PM, Gary Kotton wrote: Ok, thanks for the clarification. This means that it will not be done automagically as it is today ­ the tenant

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Masakazu Shinohara
Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward All- tl;dr * Group Based Policy API is the kind of experimentation we be should attempting

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
-To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 9:12 AM To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward Are there any parity features you are aware of that aren't receiving

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Gary Kotton
@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.commailto:gkot...@vmware.com wrote: On 8/5/14, 8:53 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.commailto:rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 01:23 PM

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Aaron Rosen
: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote: On 8/5/14, 8:53 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 01:23 PM, Gary Kotton wrote: Ok, thanks for the clarification. This means

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Gary Kotton
@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.commailto:gkot...@vmware.com wrote: From: Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.commailto:aaronoro...@gmail.com Reply-To: OpenStack List openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Christopher Yeoh
AM To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote: On 8/5/14, 8:53 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 01:23 PM

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Kyle Mestery
To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote: On 8/5/14, 8:53 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 01:23 PM

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Russell Bryant
On 08/05/2014 05:24 PM, Sumit Naiksatam wrote: On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 04:26 PM, Stephen Wong wrote: Agreed with Kevin and Sumit here. As a subgroup we talked about Nova integration, and the preliminary idea, as Bob alluded to, is to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Russell Bryant
On 08/05/2014 06:13 PM, 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Carlino, Chuck (OpenStack TripleO, Neutron)
On Aug 6, 2014, at 1:11 AM, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.commailto:aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote: I agree, I had actually proposed this here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/nova-api-quantum-create-port :), though there are some issues we need to solve in neutron first --

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Joe Gordon
On Wed, Aug 6, 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Jay Pipes
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 API endpoints You see how you used the term endpoints there? :P -jay

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Ivar Lazzaro
Hi Joe, Are you suggesting to stop/remove everything that is not related to Nova Parity for the Juno release? Because then I fail to see why this and Mark's proposal are targeted only to GBP. In my humble opinion, these kind of concerns should be addressed at BP approval time. Otherwise the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Kevin Benton
It sounds to me like you are describing how a developer uses Keystone, not a user. My reference to 'application deployer' was to someone trying to run something like a mail server on an openstack cloud. On Aug 6, 2014 7:07 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 06:13 PM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Kevin Benton
In the weekly neutron meetings it hasn't been mentioned that any of these items are at risk due to developer shortage. That's why I wanted Mark McClain to reply here because he has been leading the parity effort. On Aug 6, 2014 8:56 AM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 6,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Aaron Rosen
As a cloud admin one needs to make sure the endpoints in keystone publicurl, internalurl and adminurl all map to the right places in the infrastructure. As a cloud user (for example when using the HP/RAX public cloud that has multiple regions/endpoints) a user needs to be aware of which region

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Ronak Shah
We have diverged our attention towards nova-network- neutron parity on this thread unnecessarily. Can we discuss and collectively decide on what is the way forward for GBP in Juno release? Efforts have been made by the subteam starting from throwing PoC at last summit to spec approval to code

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Kevin Benton
What I was referring to was also not Keystone's definition of an endpoint. It's almost as if the term has many uses and was not invented for Keystone. :-) http://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsug_html_chunked/ChStatEndpoints.html Did a similar discussion occur when Heat wanted to use the word

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Joe Gordon
On Aug 6, 2014 10:21 AM, Ronak Shah ronak.malav.s...@gmail.com wrote: We have diverged our attention towards nova-network- neutron parity on this thread unnecessarily. Can we discuss and collectively decide on what is the way forward for GBP in Juno release? Efforts have been made by the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sridar Kandaswamy (skandasw)
@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward Hi Joe, Are you suggesting to stop/remove everything that is not related to Nova Parity for the Juno release? Because then I fail to see why this and Mark's proposal are targeted only

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Edgar Magana
-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward What I was referring to was also not Keystone's definition of an endpoint. It's almost as if the term has many uses and was not invented for Keystone

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Ivar Lazzaro
Which kind of uncertainty are you referring to? Given that the blueprint was approved long ago, and the code has been ready and under review following those specs... I think GBP is probably the patch with the least effort to be merged right now. Ivar. On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Joe Gordon

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Salvatore Orlando
As Ronak said, this thread is starting to move in a lot of different directions, ranging from correctness of the blueprint approval process to nova/neutron integration, which are rather off topic. In particular it seems things are being skewed towards a discussion around nova parity, whereas

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Jay Pipes
On 08/06/2014 01:22 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: What I was referring to was also not Keystone's definition of an endpoint. It's almost as if the term has many uses and was not invented for Keystone. :-) http://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsug_html_chunked/ChStatEndpoints.html Did a similar discussion

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 10:22 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward What I was referring to was also

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Ivar Lazzaro
Salvatore, Can you expand on point 2? Not sure what means in this case to 'treat it accordingly'. Thanks, Ivar. On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Salvatore Orlando sorla...@nicira.com wrote: As Ronak said, this thread is starting to move in a lot of different directions, ranging from

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Edgar Magana
Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward What I was referring to was also not Keystone's definition of an endpoint. It's almost as if the term has many uses and was not invented

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward What I was referring to was also not Keystone's definition of an endpoint. It's almost as if the term has many uses and was not invented for Keystone. :-) http://www.wireshark.org/docs

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Yapeng Wu
List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward As Ronak said, this thread is starting to move in a lot of different directions, ranging from correctness of the blueprint approval process to nova/neutron integration, which are rather off

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Henry Fourie
+1 From: Edgar Magana [mailto:edgar.mag...@workday.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 10:40 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward This is the consequence of a proposal

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Edgar Magana
Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 10:22 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Ivar Lazzaro
questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward What I was referring to was also not Keystone's definition of an endpoint. It's almost as if the term has many uses and was not invented for Keystone. :-) http

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Edgar Magana
@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 1:41 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward Hi

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Ivar Lazzaro
(not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 1:41 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward Hi Edgar

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Edgar Magana
(not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward Hi Edgar, Actually, I think that other reviewers saw that name clash, and still thought it was ok to use the same terminology

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Robert Kukura
On 8/4/14, 4:27 PM, Mark McClain wrote: All- tl;dr * Group Based Policy API is the kind of experimentation we be should attempting. * Experiments should be able to fail fast. * The master branch does not fail fast. * StackForge is the proper home to conduct this experiment. The disconnect

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Gary Kotton
Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 at 5:20 PM To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On 8/4/14, 4:27 PM, Mark McClain wrote: All- tl;dr * Group Based Policy API

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Robert Kukura
-dev@lists.openstack.org mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 at 5:20 PM To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On 8/4/14, 4:27

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Gary Kotton
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 at 8:13 PM To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On 8/5/14, 11:04

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Robert Kukura
@lists.openstack.org mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 at 8:13 PM To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward On 8/5/14, 11:04 AM, Gary Kotton

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Russell Bryant
On 08/05/2014 01:23 PM, Gary Kotton wrote: Ok, thanks for the clarification. This means that it will not be done automagically as it is today – the tenant will need to create a Neutron port and then pass that through. FWIW, that's the direction we've wanted to move in Nova anyway. We'd like

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Jay Pipes
On 08/05/2014 01:13 PM, Robert Kukura wrote: On 8/5/14, 11:04 AM, Gary Kotton wrote: Hi, Is there any description of how this will be consumed by Nova. My concern is this code landing there. Hi Gary, Initially, an endpoint's port_id is passed to Nova using nova boot ... --nic

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Kevin Benton
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 policies, etc. already setup. On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Jay Pipes
On 08/05/2014 03:24 PM, Kevin Benton 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 policies, etc. already setup. OK. Is there any reason it was

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
That's right Kevin, EPG (and its association to the L2/3_Policy) capture the attributes which would represent the network-template being referenced here. Jay, what Bob mentioned here was an option to use the endpoint as a one-to-one replacement for the option of using a Neutron port. This is more

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Stephen Wong
Agreed with Kevin and Sumit here. As a subgroup we talked about Nova integration, and the preliminary idea, as Bob alluded to, is to add endpoint as an option in place of Neutron port. But if we can make Nova EPG-aware, it would be great. On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Sumit Naiksatam

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Jay Pipes
On 08/05/2014 04:26 PM, Stephen Wong wrote: Agreed with Kevin and Sumit here. As a subgroup we talked about Nova integration, and the preliminary idea, as Bob alluded to, is to add endpoint as an option in place of Neutron port. But if we can make Nova EPG-aware, it would be great. Is anyone

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Kevin Benton
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 didn't understand the confusion because you didn't provide a reference to how endpoint is used in OpenStack now. I hadn't

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/05/2014 04:26 PM, Stephen Wong wrote: Agreed with Kevin and Sumit here. As a subgroup we talked about Nova integration, and the preliminary idea, as Bob alluded to, is to add endpoint as an option in place of Neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Jay Pipes
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 didn't understand the confusion because you didn't provide a reference to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Kevin Benton
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 the purpose of a Keystone

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Joe Gordon
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Robert Kukura kuk...@noironetworks.com wrote: On 8/4/14, 4:27 PM, Mark McClain wrote: All- tl;dr * Group Based Policy API is the kind of experimentation we be should attempting. * Experiments should be able to fail fast. * The master branch does not

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Sean Dague
On 08/05/2014 07:28 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Robert Kukura kuk...@noironetworks.com mailto:kuk...@noironetworks.com wrote: On 8/4/14, 4:27 PM, Mark McClain wrote: All- tl;dr * Group Based Policy API is the kind of experimentation we be

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-04 Thread Mark McClain
All- tl;dr * Group Based Policy API is the kind of experimentation we be should attempting. * Experiments should be able to fail fast. * The master branch does not fail fast. * StackForge is the proper home to conduct this experiment. Why this email? --- Our community has been

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-04 Thread Hemanth Ravi
Hi, I believe that the API has been reviewed well both for its usecases and correctness. And the blueprint has been approved after sufficient exposure of the API in the community. The best way to enable users to adopt GBP is to introduce this in Juno rather than as a project in StackForge. Just

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-04 Thread Ivar Lazzaro
+1 Hemanth. On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Hemanth Ravi hemanthrav...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I believe that the API has been reviewed well both for its usecases and correctness. And the blueprint has been approved after sufficient exposure of the API in the community. The best way to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-04 Thread Armando M.
Hi, When I think about Group-Based Policy I cannot help myself but think about the degree of variety of sentiments (for lack of better words) that this subject has raised over the past few months on the mailing list and/or other venues. I speak for myself when I say that when I look at the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-04 Thread loy wolfe
+1 mark On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 4:27 AM, Mark McClain mmccl...@yahoo-inc.com wrote: All- tl;dr * Group Based Policy API is the kind of experimentation we be should attempting. * Experiments should be able to fail fast. * The master branch does not fail fast. * StackForge is the proper