Hey, If duplicated implementations are to be avoided, I see these options for providing system level configuration:
- Use VPP startup configuration, for interface bonding: https://wiki.fd.io/view/VPP/Command-line_Arguments#.22dpdk.22_parameters - Use binary APIs - small python script can be used to provision base configuration. Interface bonding is not exposed via binary APIs currently - Use CLI - Similar option to binary APIs, however I think binary APIs should be preferred Honeycomb can then safely be started by the installers, it will pick up the system configuration from VPP and FDS can continue further configuration based on its needs via Honeycomb. Maros From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2016 2:47 PM To: Maros Marsalek -X (mmarsale - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <mmars...@cisco.com>; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: RE: Interface bonding (binary APIs) Hi Maros, to broaden the question: Which way do we want to go to configure "interface bonding"? >From a solutions stack perspective, we need the installer to configure bonding >as part of the network setup. Installers like Fuel or TripleO/APEX do this >today for OVS. In case of FDS, we need to have the mechanics in TripleO/Apex, >i.e. * Have a config option similar to "BondInterfaceOvsOptions" for VPP in APEX/TripleO, e.g. BondInterfaceVPPOptions (see e.g. http://docs.openstack.org/developer/tripleo-docs/advanced_deployment/network_isolation.html) along with the associated puppet manifests. * These puppet manifests would be expected to drive the associated config on VPP/DPDK. We could deal with CLI, but this is less desirable. Config through HC would be the obvious choice from a FDS perspective. That said, we have systems (like the ML2-VPP based setup), where we don't have HC present (yet), but would still need interface bonding to be configured through TripleO/APEX. This somewhat leads to the more general question how we want VPP system level config to be driven while avoiding duplicated implementations. Do we default to CLI, or do we default to HC, or what would be the common denominator? Thanks, Frank From: vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io> [mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of Maros Marsalek -X (mmarsale - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) Sent: Donnerstag, 3. November 2016 12:29 To: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io<mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>> Subject: [vpp-dev] Interface bonding (binary APIs) Hey, VPP supports interface bonding and can be configured using DPDK configuration (https://wiki.fd.io/view/VPP/Command-line_Arguments#.22dpdk.22_parameters). Is there any support for interface bonding over binary APIs ? Thanks, Maros
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
