atom feed22 messages in net.launchpad.lists.openstackRe: [Openstack] Quantum vs. Nova-netw...
FromSent OnAttachments
Dan WendlandtAug 24, 2012 3:38 pm 
Rob_...@Dell.comAug 26, 2012 12:39 pm 
Chris WrightAug 27, 2012 9:20 am 
Dan WendlandtAug 27, 2012 10:56 am 
Rob_...@Dell.comSep 3, 2012 10:47 am 
Gary KottonSep 3, 2012 11:14 pm 
Trey MorrisSep 4, 2012 1:16 pm 
andi abesSep 5, 2012 5:22 am 
Salvatore OrlandoSep 5, 2012 5:42 am 
Dan WendlandtSep 5, 2012 9:55 am 
Dan WendlandtSep 5, 2012 10:01 am 
Chris WrightSep 5, 2012 12:24 pm 
Kyle Mestery (kmestery)Sep 5, 2012 1:14 pm 
Syd (Sydney) LoganSep 5, 2012 1:59 pm 
andi abesSep 5, 2012 2:49 pm 
rohon mathieuSep 6, 2012 12:50 am 
Dan WendlandtSep 6, 2012 9:29 am 
rohon mathieuSep 7, 2012 8:36 am 
Dan WendlandtSep 7, 2012 9:56 am 
Syd (Sydney) LoganSep 7, 2012 10:34 am 
Dan WendlandtSep 7, 2012 11:11 am 
Syd (Sydney) LoganSep 7, 2012 12:01 pm 
Subject:Re: [Openstack] Quantum vs. Nova-network in Folsom
From:andi abes (andi@gmail.com)
Date:Sep 5, 2012 2:49:50 pm
List:net.launchpad.lists.openstack

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Dan Wendlandt <da@nicira.com> wrote:

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:23 AM, andi abes <andi@gmail.com> wrote:

late to the party... but I'll dabble.

On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Chris Wright <chr@sous-sol.org> wrote:

* Rob_@Dell.com (Rob_@Dell.com) wrote:

We've been discussing using Open vSwitch as the basis for non-Quantum Nova
Networking deployments in Folsom. While not Quantum, it feels like we're
bringing Nova Networking a step closer to some of the core technologies that
Quantum uses.

To what end?

OVS provides much more robust monitoring and operational facilities (e.g sFlow monitoring, better switch table visibility etc).

You won't find any disagreement from me about OVS having more advanced capabilities :)

It also provides a linux-bridge compatibility layer (ovs-brcompatd [1]), which should work out-of-box with the linux-bridge. As such, switching to using OVS rather than the linux bridge could be done without any code changes to nova, just deployment changes (e.g. ensure that ovs-brcompatd is running to intercept brctl ioctl's - [2]).

Using ovs-brcompatd would be possible, though some distros do not package and run it by default and in general it is not the "preferred" way to run things according to email on the OVS mailing list.

agreed this is providing minimal exposure to OVS capabilities. The thought was that it would provide a path to: * AVOID making ANY changes to nova-network, while still being able to use ovs * this could allow Operators to obtain operational experience running and monitoring ovs when its deployed in a somewhat degenerate deployment.

For the more adventurous, there could be any number of interesting scenarios enabled by having access to ovs capabilities (e.g. tunneling)

Tunneling is definitely a huge benefit of OVS, but you still need someone to setup the tunnels and direct packets into them correctly. That's is exactly what the Quantum OVS plugin does and it is completely open source and freely available, so if people want to experiment with OVS tunneling, using Quantum would seem like the obvious way to do this.

true. but that would require moving on to quantum, with the associated pains.

Dan

sorry if I stirred a fuss on a relatively dormant thread.

-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dan Wendlandt Nicira, Inc: www.nicira.com twitter: danwendlandt ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : open@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp