- Original Message -
> From: "PAUL CARVER"
> To: OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 6:52:32 AM
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Partially Shared Networks
>
>
>
> The particular use case I have in mind concerns ne
Sorry for this not threading properly. I had set the Mailman config to filter
on Neutron topic but it ended up filtering out everything so I only saw
responses by looking at the archive. I removed the filter in Mailman and will
have to filter locally on my end. But I don't have any of the origin
On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 11:47 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> On 01/13/2014 07:32 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 10:23 +, Stephen Gran wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I don't think that's what's being asked for. Just that there be more
> >> than the current check for '(isowner of network) or
On 01/13/2014 07:32 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 10:23 +, Stephen Gran wrote:
Hi,
I don't think that's what's being asked for. Just that there be more
than the current check for '(isowner of network) or (shared)'
If the data point could be 'enabled for network' for a given te
On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 10:23 +, Stephen Gran wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't think that's what's being asked for. Just that there be more
> than the current check for '(isowner of network) or (shared)'
>
> If the data point could be 'enabled for network' for a given tenant,
> that would be more fle
Hi,
I don't think that's what's being asked for. Just that there be more
than the current check for '(isowner of network) or (shared)'
If the data point could be 'enabled for network' for a given tenant,
that would be more flexible.
Cheers,
On 13/01/14 10:06, Mathieu Rohon wrote:
Hi,
Thi
Hi,
This is something that we potentially could implement during the
implementation of the isolated-network bp [1]
Basically, on an isolated network, an ARP responder will respond to
ARP request. For an L2 network which is totally isolated, ARP
responder will only respond to arp-request of the gat
On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 17:06 +, CARVER, PAUL wrote:
> If anyone is giving any thought to networks that are available to
> multiple tenants (controlled by a configurable list of tenants) but
> not visible to all tenants I’d like to hear about it.
>
> I’m especially thinking of scenarios where sp
If anyone is giving any thought to networks that are available to multiple
tenants (controlled by a configurable list of tenants) but not visible to all
tenants I'd like to hear about it.
I'm especially thinking of scenarios where specific networks exist outside of
OpenStack and have specific p
