Looping in GBP, SFC, and netvirt, as they are all mentioned in the proposal.
Ed On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 4:37 AM, Yang, Yi Y <[email protected]> wrote: > Ed, I read vbd source code, what it does isn’t so much. But honeycomb > isn’t ODL project, it isn’t in ODL integration release, as Abhijt said, vbd > seems not to have active development activity, so I don’t think it is a > good way to new a subproject under honeycomb/. > > > > I know some ideas in vbd are good, we can borrow some code in vbd to > implement similar things in this newly-proposed project. Again, the goal > is to avoid unnecessary duplicate effort, maybe you has different thoughts > if you consider it from sfc view angle. > > > > *From:* Ed Warnicke [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 20, 2017 5:24 AM > *To:* Yang, Yi Y <[email protected]> > *Cc:* [email protected] > > *Subject:* Re: [Project-proposals] A new project proposal vpp > > > > Yi, > > > > One thought that occurs to me is that VBD is actually honeycomb/vbd. We > may want to consider doing something under the honeycomb/* tree at ODL, > especially since we are really talking about mounting and managing > Honeycomb Agents. Those agents can certainly manage VPP, but they could > also manage other things as well. > > > > In the case of honeycomb/vdb the naming was around virtual bridge domain > (VBD)... basically naming it after the global cross node model being > translated to the particular per-node models being mounted by netconf. It > might be useful to start thinking in that direction. What is the global > cross node model we are wanting to map to the models provided by Honeycomb? > > > > Ed > > > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Yang, Yi Y <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ed, no problem, can you propose a better name? > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ed > Warnicke > *Sent:* Saturday, June 17, 2017 1:34 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Project-proposals] A new project proposal vpp > > > > With my fd.io TSC chair hat on, I would like to formally request that > this project *not* be named 'vpp' due to potential for confusion with the > fd.io vpp project. > > > > Ed > > > > >On 16/06/17 03:56, Yang, Yi Y wrote: > > >> Hi, TSC members > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> I’d like to propose a new project vpp > > >> https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:Vpp, our goal is > to > > >> avoid duplicate efforts for GBP, NetVirt and SFC vpp integration as well > > >> as fix multiple applications coexistence for VPP, I send this out per > > >> https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Simultaneous_Release: > Nitrogen_Release_Plan#Schedule > > >> in order that we can incubate it as a formal project in Nitrogen release > > >> cycle or Oxygen, please schedule review process in next TSC meeting, > > >> thank you in advance. > > > > > > I would suggest a different name, as it can end up being very confusing > > > to talk about components when multiple projects have the same name... > > > > > > Regards, > > > Robert > > > > >
_______________________________________________ sfc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev
