loy wolfe [mailto:loywo...@gmail.com] wrote:
>Then since Network/Subnet/Port will never be treated just as LEGACY >COMPATIBLE role, there is no need to extend Nova-Neutron interface to >follow the GBP resource. Anyway, one of optional service plugins inside >Neutron shouldn't has any impact on Nova side. This gets to the root of why I was getting confused about Jay and others having Nova related concerns. I was/am assuming that GBP is simply an *additional* mechanism for manipulating Neutron, not a deprecation of any part of the existing Neutron API. I think Jay's concern and the reason why he keeps mentioning Nova as the biggest and most important consumer of Neutron's API stems from an assumption that Nova would need to change to use the GBP API. If I've understood the follow on discussions correctly, there's no need for Nova to use the GBP API at all until/unless the Nova developers see benefit in it because they can continue to accomplish everything with the existing API. The GBP API simply provides a more application centric rather than network centric representation of the same thing.
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
