A reminder for folks interested that we'll have a BoF discussion on Routed
Network model (without L2) at 12.30 pm today.
I'll have the Neutron placard on one of the table outside Manet room (at
Le Meridien) for folks to find us.
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/RoutedNetworking
Thanks
Rohit
Agreed !.
Regards,
keshava
From: Kevin Benton [mailto:blak...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 2:03 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on routed networking
These are all important discussion topics
Let me know the opinion w.r.t. this ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks & regards,
>
> Keshava
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Fred Baker (fred) [mailto:f...@cisco.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 5:51 AM
> To: OpenStack
nstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on routed networking
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 21:50:09, Carl Baldwin wrote:
> Many API users won't care about the L2 details. This could be a
> compelling alternative for them. However, some do. The L2 details
> seem to matter an awful lot to man
@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 5:51 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on routed networking
On Oct 28, 2014, at 4:59 PM, Angus Lees
mailto:g...@inodes.org>> wrote:
> On Tu
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 21:50:09, Carl Baldwin wrote:
> Many API users won't care about the L2 details. This could be a
> compelling alternative for them. However, some do. The L2 details
> seem to matter an awful lot to many NFV use cases. It might be that
> this alternative is just not compel
Certainly, let’s talk next week in Paris.
On Oct 29, 2014, at 12:11 PM, Cory Benfield
wrote:
>> Some of us are looking at a different model. I’d be interested in your
>> thoughts.
>
> Fred,
>
> Thanks for the link to the drafts. They look extremely similar to the
> approach we've been pursu
> Some of us are looking at a different model. I’d be interested in your
> thoughts.
Fred,
Thanks for the link to the drafts. They look extremely similar to the
approach we've been pursuing for Project Calico, and it's good to see
that we're not the only people thinking in this direction.
It
On Oct 28, 2014, at 12:44 AM, A, Keshava wrote:
> Here thinking OpenStack cloud as hierarchical network instead of Flat
> network ?
A routed network has one lookup just like a bridged network. The difference is
that the router operates as a host in the L2 domain - it only receives or
operat
I have also started to capture some of our discussions here.
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/RoutedNetworking
Thanks
Rohit
On 10/29/14 1:32 AM, "Cory Benfield" wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 20:01:40, Kevin Benton wrote:
>> I think the simplest use case is just that a provider doesn't want t
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 20:01:40, Kevin Benton wrote:
> I think the simplest use case is just that a provider doesn't want to
> deal with extending L2 domains all over their datacenter.
This is the core motivation. As mentioned in Fred Baker's internet draft[0],
extending layer 2 domains can be e
Some of us are looking at a different model. I’d be interested in your thoughts.
The premise in this is that a great deal of the complexity in OpenStack is
basically working around the deficiencies of IPv4, especially its address space
and issues in multicast deployment. IPv6 actually addresses
e powerful cooperation with the provider
> > around
> > particular features, so I sort of think of it like a step halfway up the
> > IaaS->
> >> PaaS stack - except for networking.
> >
> > - Gus
> >
> >> Thanks
> >> Rohit
gt; > Rohit
> >
> > From: Kevin Benton mailto:blak...@gmail.com>>
> > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> > >> Date: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 1:01 PM
> > To:
ling List (not for usage questions)"
>> mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>>>> Date: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 1:01 PM
>> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>> mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>>>>
o:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> >> Date: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 1:01 PM
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on routed
>
Excerpts from Cory Benfield's message of 2014-10-24 06:38:44 -0700:
> All,
>
> Project Calico [1] is an open source approach to virtual networking based on
> L3 routing as opposed to L2 bridging. In order to accommodate this approach
> within OpenStack, we've just submitted 3 blueprints that co
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Rohit Agarwalla (roagarwa)
wrote:
> Agreed. The way I'm thinking about this is that tenants shouldn't care what
> the underlying implementation is - L2 or L3. As long as the connectivity
> requirements are met using the model/API, end users should be fine.
> The da
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> I think the simplest use case is just that a provider doesn't want to deal
> with extending L2 domains all over their datacenter.
This is similar to a goal behind [1] and [2]. I'm trying to figure
out where the commonalities and differences
There isn't a mechanism for us to get a BoF scheduled in advance. So,
let's gather at the Neutron contributors meetup on Friday.
Hopefully, some of us would have already met each other at the Neutron
design sessions before Friday and we can figure out a good time slot that
works for everyone intere
28, 2014 1:01 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on routed networking
>1. Every packet L3 FIB Lookup : Radix Tree Search, instead of current L2
gt;
> Others can give their opinion also.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> keshava
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Cory Benfield [mailto:cory.benfi...@metaswitch.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 10:35 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questi
opinion also.
Thanks & Regards,
keshava
-Original Message-
From: Cory Benfield [mailto:cory.benfi...@metaswitch.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 10:35 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on ro
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 07:44:48, A, Keshava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Current Open-stack was built as flat network.
>
> With the introduction of the L3 lookup (by inserting the routing table
> in forwarding path) and separate 'VIF Route Type' interface:
>
> At what point of time in the packet processing
014 12:36 AM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on routed networking
>
>
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> I'm interested as well in this model. Curious to understand the routing
&g
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 12:36 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on routed networking
Hi
I'm interested as well in this model. Curious to understand the routing filters
and their implementati
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 19:05:43, Rohit Agarwalla (roagarwa) wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm interested as well in this model. Curious to understand the routing
> filters and their implementation that will enable isolation between
> tenant networks.
> Also, having a BoF session on "Virtual Networking using L3
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 20:51:36, Kevin Benton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for posting this. I am interested in this use case as well.
>
> I didn't find a link to a review for the ML2 driver. Do you have any
> more details for that available?
Sure. The ML2 driver itself isn't submitted for review ye
or usage questions)"
mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][nova] New specs on routed networking
Hi,
Thanks for posting this. I am interested in this use case as well.
I didn't find a link to a review for the ML2 driver. Do you ha
Hi,
Thanks for posting this. I am interested in this use case as well.
I didn't find a link to a review for the ML2 driver. Do you have any more
details for that available?
It seems like not providing L2 connectivity between members of the same
Neutron network conflicts with assumptions ML2 will
All,
Project Calico [1] is an open source approach to virtual networking based on L3
routing as opposed to L2 bridging. In order to accommodate this approach
within OpenStack, we've just submitted 3 blueprints that cover
- minor changes to nova to add a new VIF type [2]
- some changes to neu
31 matches
Mail list logo
