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 bridg
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 integratio
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:59:30AM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 07/14/2015 10:59 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > Here's an a strawman alternative. Instead of representing a provider
> > network as a single logical network, represent it as a collection of
> > logical networks, one for each connected
Please don't drop the list.
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:24:36AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 07:59:48AM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > I think that the various issues with trying to treat a provider network
> > as a logical network are going to difficult to resolve. I think th
On 07/14/2015 10:59 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> I think that the various issues with trying to treat a provider network
> as a logical network are going to difficult to resolve. I think that
> they reflect a conceptual difference between OVN logical networks and
> provider networks. OVN knows the host
I think that the various issues with trying to treat a provider network
as a logical network are going to difficult to resolve. I think that
they reflect a conceptual difference between OVN logical networks and
provider networks. OVN knows the hosts on a logical network and where
they reside, but
