Yes
Henry Fourie wrote on 07/31/2014 12:32:23 PM:
> From: Henry Fourie
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>
> Cc: Subrahmanyam Ongole
> Date: 07/31/2014 12:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Bridging the 2
Ongole
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Bridging the 2-group gap in
group policy
Hi Ryan:
As I stated in the patch review, the suggestion to use a "profiled API" like
IETF/CCITT is indeed very interesting. As a "profiled API" has not been tried
with any neutr
I agree with Hemanth also - that this suggestion should be a different
patch. And we should proceed with the current CLI patch.
Thanks,
- Stephen
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Hemanth Ravi
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Adding this CLI command seems to be a good way to provide support for the
> second m
From: Kevin Benton
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
Date: 07/31/2014 03:01 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Bridging the 2-group gap
in group policy
I agree. Ryan, can you propose a patch b
Thanks Kevin and others for the input here. We have put this on
today's Group Policy IRC meeting agenda:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy#July_31st.2C_2014
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> I agree. Ryan, can you propose a patch based off of the
I agree. Ryan, can you propose a patch based off of the existing group
policy work so we can get an idea of what changes are required to implement
this level of abstraction?
It sounds like this is work that can be built entirely on top of the
existing abstractions and APIs offered by the current G
Hi Ryan:
As I stated in the patch review, the suggestion to use a "profiled API"
like IETF/CCITT is indeed very interesting. As a "profiled API" has not
been tried with any neutron model before, and as there is no existing
design pattern/best practices for how best to structure that, my
recommenda
: [openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Bridging the 2-group gap in
group policy
Hi,
Adding this CLI command seems to be a good way to provide support for the
second model. This can be submitted as a new review patch to work through the
approaches to implement this. I suggest the current CLI patch [1
Hi,
Adding this CLI command seems to be a good way to provide support for the
second model. This can be submitted as a new review patch to work through
the approaches to implement this. I suggest the current CLI patch [1] be
reviewed for the existing spec and completed.
Ryan, would it possible fo
As promised in Monday's Neutron IRC minutes [1], this mail is a "trip down
memory lane" looking at the history of the
Neutron GP project.. The original GP google doc [2] included specifying
policy via both a produce/consume 1-group
approach and as a link between two groups. There was an email t
10 matches
Mail list logo
