Re: [vtn-dev] Fwd: [affinity-dev] Sample Bundles in the Virtualization Edition

Luis Gomez <luis.gomez@...>

Hi Colin,


I support the idea of having apps and features doing something useful with very few (b) or no configuration (a). Only concern is for those that do not require configuration (a), at least make sure they have very low or none impact in the controller behavior or switches configuration. A good example is Topology Manager that without any configuration reads information from the switches and creates a topology with no impact in controller/switches. On the other side we have Simple Forwarding app that writes flows in the switches whenever the controller discovers a host, I think this is quite an impact for an app that runs out of the box. With this I do not mean to remove this feature or other features like this but move them to (b) -> enable them with simple configuration, what you are actually proposing.


On the other hand, I take the chance to encourage the projects to come up with a simple (first contact) demo case for their contributions and publish it in the wiki, same thing OVSDB folks have done today at TSC call:





From: vtn-dev-bounces@... [mailto:vtn-dev-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Colin Dixon
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 2:45 PM
To: <affinity-dev@...>; <opendove-dev@...>; <ovsdb-dev@...>; <defense4all-dev@...>; <vtn-dev@...>
Subject: Re: [vtn-dev] Fwd: [affinity-dev] Sample Bundles in the Virtualization Edition


For what it's worth, I'm in the process of removing the requirements to configure SimpleFowarding so that it acts as a normal L2 switch across all the ports in the system when there's no configuration.

I'm probably the primary reason that Ed says it should do *something* when it comes up because I've been hammering like crazy on that point for the base edition. I'm not sure it's as critical here that it work immediately out of the box, but making sure that either (a) it does something without configuration when it comes up or (b) we do really good job of explaining what configuration needs to be done and give some useful error if we do nothing.

Does that seem reasonable to people?

In the long run, maybe we should talk about having a NotSoSimpleForwarding bundle that is designed to take in affinity information, virtual networks, etc. and implement them properly rather than having each different solution manage the rules on their own. This would help separate the policy from the actual routes and allow for faster innovation in both.


> From: Hideyuki Tai <h-tai@...>
> Date: November 5, 2013 at 8:40:39 PM CST
> To: "Ed Warnicke (eaw)" <eaw@...>
> Cc: "<affinity-dev@...>" <affinity-
> dev@...>, "opendove-dev@..." <
> opendove-dev@...>, "ovsdb-dev@..." <
> ovsdb-dev@...>, "<defense4all-dev@...
> >" <defense4all-dev@...>, "vtn-dev@...
" <vtn-dev@...>

> Subject: RE: [affinity-dev] Sample Bundles in the Virtualization Edition

> Hi Ed,
> When someone runs and send some configuration to Affinity,
> OpenDOVE, or VTN,
> the Virtualization Edition does something useful.
> It requires some configuration, but it does something great related
> to virtualization.
> I think it's the same with simpleforwarding bundle to require configuration.
> Simpleforwarding bundle requires subnet gateway configuration to
> forward packets.
> I mean that even the Virtualization Edition include simpleforwarding,
> we need some configuration anyway.
> My one concern on simpleforwarding bundle is that simpleforwarding
> sets flow entries automatically
> after detecting host information.
> It means that simpleforwarding ignore virtual network configuration
> on Affinity and VTN,
> and may install flow entries which interfere with Affinity and VTN.
> Therefore, I would like to remove simpleforwarding bundle from the
> Virtualization Edition.
> Furthermore, I think simpleforwarding bundle doesn't do virtualization jobs,
> but just simulates a traditional IP network.
> So it is a little weird to me that the Virtualization Edition
> include simpleforwarding bundle.
> To be honest, It's not clear to me that other project in the
> Virtualization Edtion needs simpleforwarding bundle,
> or simpleforwarding bundle interfere with other bundles too.
> So I would like to hear from other project people.
> Regards,
> Hideyuki Tai

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed Warnicke (eaw) [mailto:eaw@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 12:19 AM
> To: Tai, Hideyuki
> Cc: <affinity-dev@...>; opendove-dev@...
> ; ovsdb-dev@...;

> <defense4all-dev@...>; vtn-dev@...
> Subject: Re: [affinity-dev] Sample Bundles in the Virtualization Edition
> Hideyuki,

>    My one concern on removing simple forwarding is to make sure that we have
> a virtualization edition that, when someone runs, *does*
> something useful

> (ie, pinball works) without requiring much if any configuration… thoughts?
> Ed

> On Nov 5, 2013, at 3:12 AM, Hideyuki Tai <h-tai@...> wrote:
> Hi Virtualization Edition people,

> Do any projects in the Virtualization Edition need sample bundles?

> - org.opendaylight.controller.samples.loadbalancer
> - org.opendaylight.controller.samples.sample-toaster
> - org.opendaylight.controller.samples.simpleforwarding
> Is it ok to remove all sample bundles from the Virtualization Edition?

> These bundles are just *sample* bundles,

> and already included in the Base Edition.
> Furthermore, VTN Manager does not correctly work,

> if samples.loadbalancer or samples.simpleforwarding is running.
> These bundles set flow entries to switches,
> so it might break flow entries set by VTN Manager.
> Therefore, if all bundles delivered by projects in the Virtualization Edition

> does not need these bundles,
> I would like to remove sample bundles from the Virtualization Edition.
> Thanks,

> Hideyuki Tai
> _______________________________________________

> affinity-dev mailing list
> affinity-dev@...

Join to automatically receive all group messages.