This is all good stuff. Thanks. Does/Should the neutron docs have an
openvswitch debugging page? This belongs there for easy access. Such a page
might go a long way to alleviate fears over the openvswitch backend.
Thanks,
Kevin
From: Attila Fazekas
Sent:
You can tcpdump the ovs ports as usual.
Please keep in mind ovs does not have `single contention` port.
OVS does MAC learning by default and you may not see `learned` uni-cast traffic
on a random trunk port. You MAY see BUM traffic, but many of them also can be
canceled
by neutron-ml2-ovs, AFAIK
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 9:35:07 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] Linuxbridge as the default in
On 2015-04-21 03:19:04 -0400 (-0400), Attila Fazekas wrote:
[...]
IMHO the OVS is less complex than netfilter (iptables, *tables),
if someone able to deal with reading the netfilter rules he should
be able to deal with OVS as well.
In a simple DevStack setup, you really have that many
Yes. Totally agree. I hate it that I have to spend a giant amount of
effort on one of my clouds to get a working network to my VMs when on
the other cloud I get a VM that can talk to the network.
Guess which one I think should be the default behavior?
Whichever one you choose to deploy with
I understand this is important for people, so let's keep it around - but
having software routers essentially means that it's a scaling
bottleneck.
SDN is not software routing. It's about programmatically controlling
network traffic. Please don't conflate the two because it leads to a lot of
How will it help to have a flat network where all vms, not just the ones that
need that scarce resource are on the same network consuming ips?
Thanks,
Kevin
From: Daniel Comnea
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2015 2:07:03 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not
On 2015-04-18 14:51:36 + (+), Fox, Kevin M wrote:
How will it help to have a flat network where all vms, not just
the ones that need that scarce resource are on the same network
consuming ips?
You seem to make the assumption that IP addresses are always scarce.
Perhaps for some
Replying inline.
-Original Message-
From: Monty Taylor [mailto:mord...@inaugust.com]
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 7:53 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] Linuxbridge as the default in
DevStack [was: Status of the nova-network to
On 04/18/2015 10:44 AM, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
Replying inline.
-Original Message- From: Monty Taylor
[mailto:mord...@inaugust.com] Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 7:53 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev]
[Nova][Neutron] Linuxbridge as the default in
Monty many thanks for a clear summary, fully agree with you. I have a
nightmare trying to educate developers (mainly from client side) in my
group that they need to get used with private net and not consume all FIP
because is not an unlimited resource
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 3:53 AM, Monty
Complex is kind of the wrong thing to describe the deployer complaint. Its
learning curve. To debug issues, I have to learn someting new, and I dont want
to because I dont believe I need that feature. I get it. I really do. But
there are three actors here, not just one. The deployer, the app
Currently Murano supports part of it. It provides a per cloud region app store
like functionality. But I think each deployer needs to load in the apps they
want in the catalog. I'm thinking that ui should somehow plug into an
openstack.org provided catalog of apps that OpenStack app developers
On the contrary, if you reread the message to which you were
previously replying, it's was about the unnecessary complexity of
OVS (and Neutron in general) for deployments which explicitly
_don't_ need and can never take advantage of self-service
networking. The implication being that Neutron
I definitely understand that. But what is the major complaint from
operators? I understood that quote to imply it was around Neutron's model
of self-service networking.
If the main reason the remaining Nova-net operators don't want to use
Neutron is due to the fact that they don't want to deal
On 2015-04-17 10:55:19 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote:
I understand. What I'm saying is that switching to Linux bridge
will not change the networking model to 'just connect everything
to a simple flat network'. All of the complaints about
self-service networking will still hold.
And
And since we've circled back I might add that perhaps we want nova-network
to deliver that.
Simple, reliable networking leveraging well-established off-the-shelf
technologies that satisfies the use cases Jeremy is referring to.
If regardless of changes in governance pertaining openstack project
On 2015-04-16 21:17:03 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote:
What do you disagree with? I was pointing out that using Linux
bridge will not reduce the complexity of the model of self-service
networking, which is what the quote was complaining about.
On the contrary, if you reread the message to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/17/2015 06:23 PM, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
Really, what I expect to see long term in a healthy OpenStack
ecosystem is some global AppStore like functionality baked in to
horizon. A user goes to it, selects my awesome scalable web
hosting system,
On 2015-04-17 11:49:23 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote:
I definitely understand that. But what is the major complaint from
operators? I understood that quote to imply it was around
Neutron's model of self-service networking.
My takeaway from Tom's message was that there was a concern about
No, the complaints from ops I have heard even internally, which I think is
being echo'd here is I understand how linux bridge works, I don't
opensvswitch. and I don't want to be bothered to learn to debug openvswitch
because I don't think we need it.
If linux bridge had feature parity with
Its because someone recommended devstack be switched to linux bridge so that
its easier for folks to learn openstack. but my assertion is, if all production
sites will have to run ovs (or some vendor plugin) and not linux bridge, your
hurting folks by making them think they are learning
On 17 April 2015 at 21:35, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2015-04-17 11:49:23 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote:
I definitely understand that. But what is the major complaint from
operators? I understood that quote to imply it was around
Neutron's model of self-service
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Fox, Kevin M kevin@pnnl.gov wrote:
Its because someone recommended devstack be switched to linux bridge so
that its easier for folks to learn openstack. but my assertion is, if all
production sites will have to run ovs
I believe this is a false assertion
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Salvatore Orlando sorla...@nicira.com
wrote:
let's default to linux bridge. At the end of the day I believe users
interested in OVS will find in a simple way in the documentation - possibly
even in the README file, a way for enabling it. We might even ship a
I know the DevStack issue seems to be solved, but I had to respond.inline
From: Fox, Kevin M [mailto:kevin@pnnl.gov]
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 12:28
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] Linuxbridge as the default
See my other mail in this thread about app ecosystem. Encouraging more
users/usage is a good reason to pay the cost. I think I've already given more
then my fair $0.02 on the matter though so I'll stop talking about it now.
Thanks,
Kevin
From: Rochelle Grober
In an app ecosystem, the users tend not to interact directly with the low level
plumbing, but the app developers do. So likely, its the app developers, not the
end users that care about naas in the long run. So I do agree that most users
wont directly care about naas. But they will care about
On 04/17/2015 06:48 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote:
I know the DevStack issue seems to be solved, but I had to
respond.inline
From: Fox, Kevin M [mailto:kevin@pnnl.gov] Sent: Friday, April
17, 2015 12:28 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
questions) Subject: Re:
On Apr 17, 2015, at 8:53 PM, Monty Taylor mord...@inaugust.com wrote:
On 04/17/2015 06:48 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote:
I know the DevStack issue seems to be solved, but I had to
respond.inline
From: Fox, Kevin M [mailto:kevin@pnnl.gov] Sent: Friday, April
17, 2015 12:28 To:
if linux bridge was a viable nova-network multi-host HA replacement, you'd be
OK with this change?
I'd be much more in favor of it. yes. Though I think its a long way from being
there...
planet openstack has a nice set of articles on how dvr works right now, and
having read through, I think
Just to be clear, we are talking about two different cases of complexity.
The biggest disconnect in the model seems to be that Neutron assumes
you want self service networking. Most of these deploys don't. Or even
more importantly, they live in an organization where that is never
going to be an
On 2015-04-16 18:34:40 -0700 (-0700), Kevin Benton wrote:
[...]
This is referring to the complexity of the API model for Neutron.
While this is a problem that I hope to address by making things
like shared networks more useful, it's not really relevant to this
particular discussion because the
On 17/04/15 03:09, Assaf Muller wrote:
- Original Message -
if linux bridge was a viable nova-network multi-host HA replacement, you'd
be OK with this change?
I'd be much more in favor of it. yes. Though I think its a long way from
being there...
planet openstack has a nice set of
What do you disagree with? I was pointing out that using Linux bridge will
not reduce the complexity of the model of self-service networking, which is
what the quote was complaining about.
I just wanted to point out that one of the 'major disconnects' as I
understand it will not get any better by
- Original Message -
if linux bridge was a viable nova-network multi-host HA replacement, you'd
be OK with this change?
I'd be much more in favor of it. yes. Though I think its a long way from
being there...
planet openstack has a nice set of articles on how dvr works right now,
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:09:24PM EDT, Tom Fifield wrote:
On 16/04/15 10:54, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
Yes, but if stuff like dvr is the only viable replacement to
nova-network in production, then learning the non representitive config
of neutron with linuxbridge might be misleading/counter
On 14/04/15 23:36, Dean Troyer wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
mangel...@redhat.com mailto:mangel...@redhat.com wrote:
Why would operators install from devstack? that’s not going to be
the case.
If they do they need more help than we can give...
So,
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Tom Fifield t...@openstack.org wrote:
If they do they need more help than we can give...
So, ummm, there is actually a valid use case for ops on devstack: it's
part of the learning process.
Yes, this is very true. The context in my mind included the
Yes, but if stuff like dvr is the only viable replacement to nova-network
in production, then learning the non representitive config of neutron with
linuxbridge might be misleading/counter productive since ovs looks very very
different.
Kevin
From: Tom
On 16/04/15 10:54, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
Yes, but if stuff like dvr is the only viable replacement to
nova-network in production, then learning the non representitive config
of neutron with linuxbridge might be misleading/counter productive since
ovs looks very very different.
Sure, though
Sure, though on the other hand, doesn't current discussion seem to indicate
that OVS with DVR is not a viable replacement for nova-network multi-host HA
(eg due to complexity), and this is why folks were working towards linux
bridge?
Some openstacker doesn’t believe ovs performance is
On 10/4/2015, at 20:10, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Sean M. Collins s...@coreitpro.com
mailto:s...@coreitpro.com wrote:
We already tried to make Neutron the default with OVS - and the results
were not good[1].
Operators who are currently not
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
mangel...@redhat.com wrote:
Why would operators install from devstack? that’s not going to be the
case.
If they do they need more help than we can give...
I
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
mangel...@redhat.com wrote:
Why would operators install from devstack? that’s not going to be the case.
If they do they need more help than we can give...
I believe we should have both LB OVS well tested, if LB is a good option
for
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:37:28AM EDT, Dr. Jens Rosenboom wrote:
FWIW, I think I made some progress in getting [1] to work, though if someone
could jump in and make a proper patch from my hack, that would be great.
[1] https://review.openstack.org/168423
Hi,
Just wanted to write a quick
46 matches
Mail list logo
