Ya, that makes sense now that you mention it. We will still need node groups to act as partitioning for the rack values
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 1:44 AM Sergey Vasilenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Andrew Woodward <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Regardless of computing all the routes, we need to compute same role, but >> multi-segement routes. In this case I see that nodegroups becomes >> redundant. It's only value is that it may be a simpler interface then >> templates but it imposes the old network topology which I could see people >> wanting to get away from. > > > I do not agree with unnecessary node groups. > Yes, move route calculation is a good idea and I think we should implement > it. > > But removing node groups... When we will implement multi-rack feature we > will need some abstraction for store rack-specific attributes. Node groups > are seems appropriate for this role. > > /sv > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- -- Andrew Woodward Mirantis Fuel Community Ambassador Ceph Community
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
