On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:15 PM, John McDowall < jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote: > > I was hoping to have a broad informal meetup at Openstack Summit – I agree > with keeping everything in the open. I was hoping to get some additional > use cases from interested parties as it will help focus our efforts. >
That sounds great. Don't let me hold you back from doing so by not being there. I know that there are several other people interested in this. > I will work on the four items – a good plan. I assume that for 2 we are > proposing an additional table in the ovn-nb – table 4 in the ingress path? > Yes, I think so, anyway. > For the more distributed cases I see three scenarios: > > 1. All applications and VNF's in the same subnet – this currently > works with no problems. > 2. Application being inserted and VNF’s in the same subnet and other > applications on remote subnets – I think this will work with some changes > to support routing. > 3. VNF’s in a subnet and applications on different subnets. We > discussed this internally and can see this is a valid use case; user might > want to centralize all VNF’s for management/admin or specific hardware > allocation reasons, though “network tromboning" would be an issue. I think > it could be addressed with some additional parameters but I have not dug > into it deeply yet. > 4. Any others? > > That sounds reasonable to me. -- Russell Bryant
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
