On 07/21/2015 03:07 PM, Salvatore Orlando wrote: > This makes sense to me as well. > > It's surely better to have structured data rather then encode them in > resource names. > > In the options attribute for a "local" logical port, I guess the "name" > attribute will be the name of some ovs bridge instance where the port is > plugged. > From a neutron integration perspective, will neutron need to store > host:bridge mappings? Or can we just assume that for a given physical > network there will always be a bridge with an assigned name on every host?
My plan was to not make Neutron have to deal with this at all. It would take the name and pass it down to OVN. In OVN, ovn-controller would have a bridge-mappings configuration item similar to the existing Neutron ovs agent's bridge mappings config. We would expect the bridge mapping and the associated bridge to exist on every chassis (hypervisor) where a port on the provider network would be bound. The current implementation for the OVN side is here: http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2015-July/057849.html -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
