that or not.
Thanks for you reply, Peter !!!
Thanks
from Peter
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:14:38 +0100
Subject: Re: [Openstack] openvswitch instead of quantum
From: sorla...@nicira.com
To: mcheun...@hotmail.com
CC: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Yes, it is a very common use case.Nowadays
HiAny people is using open vswitch directly, instead of sing quantum?Is it
a common practice?
Thanksfrom Peter ___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Yes, it is a very common use case.
Nowadays, everybody who deploys Xen, KVM, or LXC without a Cloud Management
System is actually using Open vSwitch.
In that case you can program Open vSwitch using its own interface to
provide virtual networks.
When deploying Openstack, you can use Open vSwitch
then
parse the output. But this is not a good practice.3) i want to do
live-migration with auto network transfer in pandora. So i need to control a
vswitch.
Thanksfrom Peter
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:14:38 +0100
Subject: Re: [Openstack] openvswitch instead of quantum
From: sorla...@nicira.com
On 22.06.2013 12:14, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
Yes, it is a very common use case.
Nowadays, everybody who deploys Xen, KVM, or LXC without a Cloud
Management System is actually using Open vSwitch.
In that case you can program Open vSwitch using its own interface to
provide virtual networks.
Comments inline.
Salvatore
On 22 June 2013 14:09, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn denni...@conversis.de wrote:
On 22.06.2013 12:14, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
Yes, it is a very common use case.
Nowadays, everybody who deploys Xen, KVM, or LXC without a Cloud
Management System is actually using Open
requirements, so
you need to write something new?
[1] http://networkheresy.com/tag/ovsdb/
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pfaff-ovsdb-proto-02
Thanks
from Peter
--
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:14:38 +0100
Subject: Re: [Openstack] openvswitch instead of quantum
From
7 matches
Mail list logo
