On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Russell Bryant <rbry...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 02/20/2015 09:51 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Russell Bryant <rbry...@redhat.com > > <mailto:rbry...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > *** Create a Neutron ML2 mechanism driver that implements the > mappings > > on Neutron resource requests > > > > Do we want to do an ML2 MechanismDriver or do a full-fledged plugin? > > Since we're starting from scratch here, we should evaluate the pros and > > cons of this decision. It does save some code, but do we envision > > running OVN with other ML2 MechanismDrivers at the same time? > > > > Note I'm not necessarily saying I'm in favor of doing a full plugin, > > only that we should think about it a bit before deciding which path to > take. > > I don't have a strong opinion here. I just thought a ML2 mech driver > was the preferred method these days. > > It is. The only reason I brought this up is that we're likely to discuss the future of the default ML2+OVS reference implementation in Vancouver and it's future. One possibility is spinning it all out into stackforge. That would affect things here, so just wanted to make sure you were aware of this. Overall, even if we start with ML2, we can quite easily move to a standalone plugin if needed, so I think starting with ML2 should be fine. > -- > Russell Bryant > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
