Hi folks, Great to see the Essex discussion starting up.
I know there are several parties looking to integrate advanced network services (e.g., L3 forwarding, firewalling, load balancing, WAN bridging, WAN optimization, etc.) with Quantum. Such services are a key part of why we wanted to develop Quantum in the first place, and I definitely don't want to down play that. I do, however, think we have to be a bit careful about trying to boil the ocean at the design summit. We probably aren't going to get everyone to agree on an API for all L3-L7 network services in a three day span and trying to do so might risk taking the focus off of vary practical things that we need to do to make sure Quantum a scalable and production quality system for those looking to take it into production during the Essex time period (I know we have a set of customers in this class, and I'm guessing others on this list do as well). I would propose a 3-phase summit approach for NetStack: - Phase 1: well-scoped / practical blueprints (e.g., API v1.1, improving API auth, vmware/bridge plugins). - Phase 2: discuss general design of how we insert higher-level network services. This will talk about how such services can interact with Quantum, but does not attempt to design the service itself. Given the number of different groups I expect to be working in this space in the coming months, I definitely think we want to give the community a structure for how such services should or should not be integrated. As I mentioned last week, I will be putting together a blueprint on this and would welcome participation by others. - Phase 3: discuss details (e.g., supported functionality, API) of specific advanced network services. Probably the most likely candidates based on discussions at the diablo summit are security policies/ACLs, L3 functionality, and WAN-bridging/DC-interconnect. The expectation would be that at the summit we at least come up with a basic framework for how these services might integrate with Quantum (with respect to the phase 2 discussion) and start to build a core group of people interested in working on them during the Essex timeframe. What do others think about this approach? Dan On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Salvatore Orlando < salvatore.orla...@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > Hi Ram, **** > > ** ** > > Thanks for sharing your proposed sessions for the design summit.**** > > I think that for this summit we will not be creating blueprints and them > propose them for “sprint” as we did for Diablo, but we should rather propose > sessions on the summit.openstack.org/sessions.**** > > However, since we are going to have our own track, it will be good to hear > some organizational details from Thierry how many sessions we can fit in it. > **** > > ** ** > > All the elements in your list make perfect sense for me. However, I’m > afraid I do not understand very well what do you mean by “Hybrid Cloud > Service Framework”. Can you elaborate a bit more on this?**** > > ** ** > > I think your list is not very far from mine, and we can probably merge them > as follows:**** > > ** ** > > **1. **L3 networking services (beyond IPAM) **** > > **2. **Higher layer network services (L4/L7)**** > > **1. **Firewall and Security Groups**** > > **2. **Network Acceleration Services Insertion Framework > LB, Symmetric services – Acceleration services and so on**** > > **3. **NAT**** > > **4. **VPN Access**** > > **3. **Quantum “Basic” Plugin**** > > **1. **Linux Bridge**** > > **2. **Solution supporting all hypervisor platforms including > ESX/Hyper-V**** > > **4. **Hybrid Cloud Service Framework**** > > **5. **Quantum API v1.1**** > > **1. **Synchronous vs Asynchronous behaviour and concept of > “Operational Status”**** > > **2. **Improvements such as Filtering, Rate Limiting, Resource > Links, pagination**** > > **6. **Cloud Bridging APIs in Quantum**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* Ram Durairaj (radurair) [mailto:radur...@cisco.com] > *Sent:* 19 September 2011 16:21 > *To:* Salvatore Orlando; netstack@lists.launchpad.net > *Cc:* Thierry Carrez > *Subject:* RE: [Netstack] Proposing sessions for Openstack design summitq* > *** > > ** ** > > Hello Salvatore and all:**** > > ** ** > > We suppose to have a Netstack track…Its good to follow-up with Thierry to > group all the Net stack related blueprint and sessions in one track for all > the interested community participants to contribute and discuss.**** > > ** ** > > In addition to the list, here are few more items from our side:**** > > ** ** > > **1. **L3 Service – As a service as Quantum**** > > **2. **Hybrid Cloud Service Framework**** > > **3. **Network Acceleration Services Insertion Framework (LB, > Symmetric services – Acceleration services and so on)**** > > **4. **Quantum Asynchronous API mode**** > > **5. **Quantum Security Groups support**** > > **6. **Quantum “Basic Plugin (Linux bridge?)**** > > ** ** > > Few more services we are discussing internally and we will add them here. > **** > > ** ** > > Thanks**** > > > Ram**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* netstack-bounces+radurair=cisco....@lists.launchpad.net [mailto: > netstack-bounces+radurair=cisco....@lists.launchpad.net] *On Behalf Of > *Salvatore > Orlando > *Sent:* Monday, September 19, 2011 7:49 AM > *To:* netstack@lists.launchpad.net > *Subject:* [Netstack] Proposing sessions for Openstack design summitq**** > > ** ** > > Hello fellow NetStackers, **** > > ** ** > > The list of proposed session at http://summit.openstack.org/sessions is > filling up, and I think it is time we start proposing our own sessions as > well.**** > > ** ** > > Actually, there are already two accepted sessions for NetStack:**** > > ** ** > > **1. **Donabe/API models: > http://summit.openstack.org/sessions/view/29**** > > **2. **Continuous integration planning: > http://summit.openstack.org/sessions/view/35**** > > ** ** > > On top of these two, I would also consider having the following sessions > (in order of importance):**** > > **1. **Higher layer network services (L4/L7), e.g.: Firewall, NAT, > VPN**** > > **2. **Improved authorization framework for Quantum, with a full > RBAC model.**** > > **3. **Quantum API v1.1**** > > **a. **Synchronous vs Asynchronous behaviour and concept of > “Operational Status”**** > > **b. **Improvements such as Filtering, Rate Limiting, Resource Links, > pagination**** > > **4. **Cloud Bridging APIs in Quantum**** > > ** ** > > What’s your opinion?**** > > ** ** > > Cheers,**** > > Salvatore**** > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~netstack > Post to : netstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~netstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dan Wendlandt Nicira Networks, Inc. www.nicira.com | www.openvswitch.org Sr. Product Manager cell: 650-906-2650 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~netstack Post to : netstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~netstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp