Hi,
Thanks for the comments. Please see my replies inline. I hope that these
will not take up too much CPU on your side.
Thanks
Gary
On 05/21/2012 07:57 PM, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
Btw, this actually isn't the case for the OVS plugin. The OVS vif
driver in Nova passes the entire attachment UUID to OVS by setting an
attribute on the local OVSDB entry for that port (note: the ovsdb is a
simple embedded database that runs as part of OVS on the hypervisor...
it is completely distinct from the primary database used by the OVS
plugin).
Can you please point me out to the code in Nova. I want to make sure
that I have my bases covered.
In addition to this I think that there are a number of additional
issues that we need to address:
1. Inclusion of openstack common - on the IRC last night it was
mentioned to have a blueprint for the config (I feel this only
addresses a small part of the problem). I think that we should do
this for the openstack common project. Thgis will be healthier in
the short and long run.
I think the proposal was to use the existing config library that is
already a part of openstack common. Is that what you are suggesting,
or something else?
Yes, this is correct. As far as I understand the Open Stack common
library may not support 2.4. It may have to be updated.
2. Python 2.4. I have yet to understand how to identify which
modules are from later versions. If this is a MUST for the agents
then we can leave the agents as they are and introduce new agents
that support RPC. Is this a viable solution?
I'd REALLY like to avoid having the core team work on two separate
versions the agents for 2.4 vs. > 2.4. I think it would slow us down.
For 2.4 things that are purely syntactic (e.g., not using "as" for
exceptions), I think its fine for us to enforce this as part of our
code review process. If there are libraries important to new
capabilities where the clearly superior choice is not an option for
2.4, I think we need to raise this as a community discussion point.
Is there a particular module you have in mind?
I am not familiar with Xen. I am trying to understand why the agents
have to run in dom0. From my understand the VIF driver does not run in
dom0. Would it be possible to understand why the driver has to run in dom0?
I am not sure if you have read
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MbcBA2Os4b98ybdgAw2qe_68R1NG6KMh8zdZKgOlpvg/edit.
I have the linuxbridge up and running. This make use of a hacked library
of the RPC - hopefully in the near future we will be able to import the
common library. Once the linux bridge library is up and running I'll
proceed to make the changes to the OVS.
Thanks
Gary
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~netstack
Post to : netstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~netstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
