Yeah, it seems ML2 at the least should save you a lot of boilerplate. On Feb 25, 2015 2:32 AM, "Russell Bryant" <rbry...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 02/24/2015 05:38 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > > OVN implementing it's own control plane isn't a good reason to make it a > > monolithic plugin. Many of the ML2 drivers are for technologies with > > their own control plane. > > > > Going with the monolithic plugin only makes sense if you are certain > > that you never want interoperability with other technologies at the > > Neutron level. Instead of ruling that out this early, why not make it as > > an ML2 driver and then change to a monolithic plugin if you run into > > some fundamental issue with ML2? > > That was my original thinking. I figure the important code of the ML2 > driver could be reused if/when the switch is needed. I'd really just > take the quicker path to making something work unless it's obvious that > ML2 isn't the right path. As this thread is still ongoing, it certainly > doesn't seem obvious. > > -- > Russell Bryant > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
