Re: New project proposed
Glend Ren
Hi, Daya We plan to use netconf to configure other devices and some private api for special third party devices in the future. Current netconf is not implemented in our HNI module and it is mainly based on openflow. We can consider your suggestion that these devices are configured via netvirt. The arp module of netvirt can response the vm of openstack platform. But HNI may involve other platforms such as vmware platform. Netvirt can not response the vm of vmware platform. One function of HNI is to connect the vlan network of vmware platform and the vxlan network of the openstack platform. So the arp module can response for the vms of vmware platform. When users send the rpc request to the controller, HNI can get all the vms information of openstack network and vmware network that users want to connect. Then the arp module of HNI writes the arp response flow tables to the ovs.
|
||
|
||
Re: New project proposed
Glend Ren
Hi,Anil (1) Current we are not considering Kubernetes networking support/extension. But your suggestion is a good idea. We can put it in the next step. (2) The netconf、private api Is the interfaces we reserve for some special third party devices in the future. It is not real implemented. At present, we are mainly based on the OVS. (3) TSDR and message bus are also the reserved function for future. We plan to use TSDR to automatically collect data, such as resource, connection, status and so on, to realize monitoring, problem location, performance optimization and so on and use message bus to support some external orchestrator such as monitoring platform. Now the core function of HNI is mainly based on flow table. Glend Thanks 2018-07-27 17:07 GMT+08:00 Anil Vishnoi <vishnoianil@...>:
|
||
|
||
Re: New project proposed
Dayavanti Gopal Kamath <dayavanti.gopal.kamath@...>
Thanks sam. Glend, a few more questions from me. ODL has the netvirt service today which can configure a hwvtep today via ovsdb based on openstack l2gw configuration. It looks like semantically, you are looking at extending a similar operation to other devices via netconf. So, it could potentially be an extension of the netvirt service, or if you create a netconf schema for these devices, these could be stitched via netvirt as well. Wrt. the ARP module, again netvirt has some services where an auto-ARP responder is programmed inside OVS for router interfaces. Netvirt is also able to learn from vm grat ARPs, and arp responses for unknown IPs. Can you please provide more clarity on the scope of the new arp module, will it be a stand alone service, and what are the scenarios in which it will work.
Thanks, daya
From: Sam Hague [mailto:shague@...]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2018 6:01 PM To: Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> Cc: TSC <tsc@...>; glendren12@...; project-proposals <project-proposals@...>; Dayavanti Gopal Kamath <dayavanti.gopal.kamath@...> Subject: Re: [Project-proposals] New project proposed
Adding Daya to thread.
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 1:56 PM Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: New project proposed
Sam Hague
Adding Daya to thread.
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 1:56 PM Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: New project proposed
Abhijit Kumbhare
Added the TSC as well.
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 10:55 AM Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: New project proposed
Abhijit Kumbhare
Glend, Thanks, Abhijit
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 2:08 AM Anil Vishnoi <vishnoianil@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: New project proposed
Anil Vishnoi
Hi Glend, Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions (1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal? (2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage to write their extension for the device? (3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ? (4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)? (5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall architecture. Thanks Anil
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:00 AM Glend REN <glendren12@...> wrote:
--
Thanks Anil
|
||
|
||
New project proposed
Glend Ren
Hi: we propose a project to the opendaylight committee. Here is the reference I am looking forwards your replay. Thanks.
|
||
|
||
(No subject)
Glend Ren
Hi: we propose a project to the opendaylight committee. Here is the reference I am looking forwards your replay. Thanks. Best regards!
|
||
|
||
Attention TSC members: New Project Proposal - ServiceUtils (genius repo split) - vote on June 14 TSC meeting?
Abhijit Kumbhare
Hi TSC members, Hence I am willing to consider the two weeks notice period to start from May 31 (when this was first brought up) and have it up for a vote in tomorrow's TSC meeting i.e. June 14 - unless some TSC member is opposed and wants more time to review it. I will put it for the agenda tomorrow - in case any TSC member disagrees I will move it to the next week TSC meeting. Please respond to this email thread in case you are opposed to having a vote in the meeting tomorrow i.e. June 14. Faseela or someone knowledgeable about the project proposal - please attend the meeting tomorrow to answer any questions regarding the proposal that may be asked. Thanks, Abhijit
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 1:37 AM Faseela K <faseela.k@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
New Project Proposal - ServiceUtils (genius repo split)
Faseela K <faseela.k@...>
Hi,
As discussed in last TSC call, we presented the scope of the SRM feature which is currently in GENIUS, at TWS. The decision was to spin off a separate project, starting with SRM, and other utils if any in Genius which SRM depends on, to enable the smooth usage of this functionality across applications. The project proposal can be seen below, please let us know when we can have a creation review at TSC for the same.
https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ServiceUtils
Please do let me know, whether I should raise a helpdesk request and get the repo created and migrate code, before we can do a creation review.
Thanks, Faseela
|
||
|
||
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
I would strongly recommend that the repo and package name line up. Not
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
doing so breaks all of the other standards we've got in ODL around artifact naming. -Andy-
On 06/06/2018 08:40 AM, Thanh Ha wrote:
Agreed. When looking at ODL's Gerrit system it's obvious that this is an --
Andrew J Grimberg Lead, IT Release Engineering The Linux Foundation
|
||
|
||
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Thanh Ha <thanh.ha@...>
Agreed. When looking at ODL's Gerrit system it's obvious that this is an ODL project however when looking from PyPi that wouldn't be obvious at all. We could have supporttools as the repo name, but deploy to PyPi as odltools though but then there's a mismatch in name to repo. Regards, Thanh
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Sam Hague <shague@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Sam Hague
Can we stay with odltools? These tools are installed via pip install odltools so it is better if it has odl in the package name. Adding support doesnt add much as tools implies the same.
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 10:02 AM Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...> wrote: I'm good with 'supporttools'
|
||
|
||
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...>
I'm good with 'supporttools'
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
JamO
On 6/6/18 3:03 AM, Michael Vorburger wrote:
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Robert Varga <nite@... <mailto:nite@...>> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Michael Vorburger <vorburger@...>
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Robert Varga <nite@...> wrote:
+1 to supporttools, that's more specific than "[odl]tools" which could be anything and everything. Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the Orange Network
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...> wrote: So, besides maybe a better name there was no other comments. Can we ODL Support Tools sounds good. I would prefer the smaller odltools for the repo name.
______________________________ TSC mailing list TSC@... https://lists.opendaylight.
|
||
|
||
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Robert Varga
Since odl is kind of implicit... supporttools or somesuch? Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the Orange Network
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...> wrote: So, besides maybe a better name there was no other comments. Can we ODL Support Tools sounds good. I would prefer the smaller odltools for the repo name.
|
||
|
||
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Sam Hague
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...> wrote: So, besides maybe a better name there was no other comments. Can we ODL Support Tools sounds good. I would prefer the smaller odltools for the repo name.
|
||
|
||
please unsubscribe
Hongtao Yin
|
||
|
||
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...>
So, besides maybe a better name there was no other comments. Can we
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
do what's next to vote for an approval? I like "ODL Support Tools" as a name. what about repo name? keep it odltools, or the longer odlsupporttools? JamO
On 5/22/18 10:47 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
On 22/05/18 01:01, Jamo Luhrsen wrote:Hi,OpenDaylight (Support|Debug) Tools perhaps, just not to get into
|
||
|