Hi John, Sorry for the late response. I was completely tied up with something.
I agree with your comments on the use cases. >Once there are the use cases, given all the Config vs API debates, I >would look at the pure data flow, in a Config/API agnostic way. >Agreeing the info needed from the user, then in the VIF driver, then >in between, etc. We should be able to agree on that, before returning >to the host aggregates API vs something new API vs more config debate. I have seen your comments with Irenab’s nova-spec. I will try to reply as well. And let’s go over the use cases outlined in that spec in tomorrow’s IRC meeting. Thanks, Robert On 4/10/14, 4:40 AM, "John Garbutt" <j...@johngarbutt.com> wrote: >Apologies, that came out all wrong... > >On 10 April 2014 09:28, John Garbutt <j...@johngarbutt.com> wrote: >> I think writing this up as a nova-spec is going to make this process >> much easier: >> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints#Nova >> >> It will save you having to re-write your document once you want to >> submit a blueprint, and we can all see each others comments in gerrit, >> and more clearly see how things change and evolve. The way the >> template in nova-spec works, it should also help you with structuring >> your argument. > >Thats just want I would find easier, its just a suggestion. > >> Please don't design assuming a single vendor solution, that is sure to >> get rejected (at least my me) at the blueprint review stage. You might >> want a different vendor in each AZ to isolate you from failures due to >> vendor bugs, if you are digging for a use case. > >I guess thats a tenant use case, I got confused reading through those. > >> I still can't see a clear description of the "tenant" use cases, I >> still think thats the key to getting agreement here, and getting >> useful feedback at the summit. Not sure I understand the tables, they >> seem a bit confusing/distracting. > >Sorry, forgot to mention, you are making good progress here. But, >given the loop we are going around here, I think agreeing the "ideal" >use cases, then looking at the detail, and looping back to see if >everything "works" is probably the right approach. Other ideas >welcome! > >Once there are the use cases, given all the Config vs API debates, I >would look at the pure data flow, in a Config/API agnostic way. >Agreeing the info needed from the user, then in the VIF driver, then >in between, etc. We should be able to agree on that, before returning >to the host aggregates API vs something new API vs more config debate. >Right it doesn't seem to be clear what is required, so its hard to >know what the best approach is, compared to other features we already >have in Nova. > >At the moment I am struggling to see the whole picture, getting the >general idea clear before the summit would be awesome, so we can >discuss how to stage the implementation, deal with backwards >compatibility, etc. > >Thanks, >John > >> On 10 April 2014 09:14, yongli he <yongli...@intel.com> wrote: >>> 于 2014年04月10日 15:59, Irena Berezovsky 写道: >>> >>> Hi Robert, >>> >>> Thanks a lot the inputs you posted in the doc. >>> >>> I have raised there few questions and added use case for High >>>Availability. >>> >>> Another concern I have is regarding the assumption that there is no >>>case to >>> mix different vendor cards in the setup. I think that mixing Cisco and >>>Intel >>> or Mellanox cards does not make sense, but Intel and Mellanox cards can >>> coexist. At least for my understanding, but I may be wrong, both Intel >>>and >>> Mellanox take HW VEB (HW embedded switch) approach. >>> >>> 1. open to mail list. >>> 2. admin/usr won't mixing Intel/Cisco/Mellanox card...., does not mean >>>we >>> should disable it, or don't give a chance. >>> 3. i raise couple of question and questioning the aggregate solution. >>>see >>> inline comments. >>> >>> >>>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zgMaXqrCnad01-jQH7Mkmf6amlghw9RMScGL >>>BrKslmw/edit >>> >>> Yongli He >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Irena >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Robert Li (baoli) [mailto:ba...@cisco.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 11:11 PM >>> To: Irena Berezovsky; Sandhya Dasu (sadasu); Robert Kukura; He, Yongli >>> (yongli...@intel.com); Itzik Brown; beag...@redhat.com >>> Subject: Re: PCI SR-IOV use cases initial doc >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> I updated the doc with some of my thoughts. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/24/14, 8:41 AM, "Irena Berezovsky" <ire...@mellanox.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have created the initial doc to capture PCI SR-IOV networking use >>>cases: >>> >>> >>>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zgMaXqrCnad01-jQH7Mkmf6amlghw9RMScGL >>>BrKslmw/edit >>> >>> >>> >>> I have updated the agenda for tomorrow meeting to discuss the use >>>cases. >>> >>> >>> >>> Please comment and update >>> >>> >>> >>> BR, >>> >>> Irena >>> >>> _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
