Posted on February 18, 2015 by Randy Bias
Voting for presentations at the Vancouver OpenStack Summit is now open. Please help us by voting on the sessions submitted by EMC Federation speakers along with any other sessions that cover topics that might interest you. Please vote at your earliest convenience since each vote helps!
OpenStack community members are voting on presentations to be presented at the OpenStack Summit, May 18-22, in Vancouver, Canada. Hundreds of high-quality submissions were received, and your votes can help determine which ones to include in the schedule.
PDF containing all of the submissions by the EMC Federation:
https://my.syncplicity.com/share/6ndhnwrkpxkgodp/OpenStack%20Liberty%20Summit%20-%20Vancouver%20-%20EMC%20Federation%20Session%20Proposals%20v2
Here is a list you can click through to vote.
Thank you so much for taking the time to vote on these sessions!
Posted in OpenStack | Leave a commentPosted on February 12, 2015 by Randy Bias
Recently, some more talk was had around the future of the EC2 APIs, beginning with some comments on the openstack-operators mailing list, followed by threads on the dev and foundation mailing list. This ultimately resulted in a suggested commit to officially “deprecate” the EC2 APIs from Nova. This commit was rejected, but make sure you read through the commentary if you have time. Some really great perspective. If you don’t here’s my basic summation:
As many people know, I’m passionate about this subject. If you missed the blog posting that caused a massive kerfuffle in summer of 2013, now is the time to take a look again: OpenStack’s Future Depends on Embracing Amazon. Now. There was a pretty massive response to that original article, including a very vibrant OpenStack meetup with a debate that was covered live between myself and Boris Renski, co-founder of Mirantis.
I am proud of driving that conversation, but one pushback that arose could be summarized as: “put your money where your mouth is”. At the time we were already working towards a goal that would have responded to this pushback but it’s taken alot longer than I would like to materialize.
We are finally there. Let me explain.
The StackForge Standalone EC2 API
It’s taken a while and the entire backstory and history isn’t really relevant for this article, but Cloudscaling (now part of EMC) has been working diligently to build a drop-in replacement for the existing Nova EC2 API. This standalone EC2 API can be found in StackForge. This re-implementation of the EC2 APIs is now ready for prime time and serendipitously you can see from the opening comments that the community is very interested in adopting it.
Some details on the status of the new EC2 API can be found in the initial documentation in the commit.
To summarize, the new standalone API:
This is very exciting and it’s what the community has been asking for. More importantly, to me, at least, is that the EC2 API could potentially stay in StackForge and become an optional plugin to OpenStack, letting those who care use it while also allowing the team who is maintaining it to iterate at a slightly different speed from the current 6-month integrated release cycle.
For those who are wondering, it’s EMC’s intention to continue to invest into and maintain this API bridge to OpenStack.
The EC2 API Still Matters to OpenStack
During the “debate” that occurred in 2013, I was frequently bemused by the attempts of community members to downplay the importance of the EC2 APIs. I think it’s all settled down now and generally accepted that we want the EC2 APIs to live on and succeed in OpenStack-land and hopefully we’ll even support other APIs down the road.
For those who are still holdouts though, I think the latest OpenStack User Survey data continues to reinforce how important the EC2 and other AWS APIs are:
What’s enlightening here is that in 2013 I was hearing the constant refrain of “the EC2 APIs are used by only a ‘fraction’ of the community”. That ‘fraction’ was *merely* ~30-35% at the time according to the user surveys. As you can see, usage of the EC2 APIs has actually increased since that time and now we’re at 44% for production deployments, a 25% increase in roughly 18 months. This is very important.
It means that usage of the EC2 APIs is increasing, fairly dramatically, over time.
I’ll reiterate again, since folks still sometimes get confused, I’m not advocating dropping the OpenStack APIs in favor of AWS. I’m advocating embracing the AWS APIs, making them a first class citizen, and viewing AWS as a partner, not an enemy. A partner in making cloud big for everyone.
This reality inside the OpenStack community is starting to materialize and I need your help.
The Game Plan
Awesome, we have a new set of improved EC2 APIs, a path towards supporting them and deprecating the old. Whether you love the EC2 APIs or hate them, it’s good for everyone to move them out of the default deployment, create greater isolation between these APIs and OpenStack internals, and to have a path forward where they can be maintained with love.
Everybody wins, even the detractors.
Well, to get this the rest of the way, we need to do the following:
I really appreciate all of the supporters and also detractors who have been involved in this discussion. I believe that this kind of debate and action, like the Internet before it and the IETF mantra of old (“running code and rough consensus”), is what makes OpenStack great. Completing this project will also provide us a blueprint for how we support the public APIs of other public clouds in OpenStack-land.
Finally, a big thanks to Alex Levine, Feodor Tersin, and Andrey Pavlov, for being the tip of the spear on this work. Without them we wouldn’t have made it this far.
Posted in OpenStack | Leave a commentPosted on February 3, 2015 by Randy Bias
One of the biggest failures of OpenStack to date is expectation setting. New potential OpenStack users and customers come into OpenStack and expect to find:
Unfortunately, none of this exists and probably none of it should have ever been expected since OpenStack won’t ever become a unified cloud operating system.
The problem can be summed up by a request I still see regularly from customers:
I want ‘vanilla OpenStack’
Vanilla OpenStack does not exist, never has existed, and never will exist.
Examining The Request
First of all, it’s a reasonable request. The potential new OpenStack customer is indirectly asking for those things that led them to OpenStack in the first place. The bi-annual user survey has already told us what people care about:
The top reasons for OpenStack boil down to:
Hence the desire for “vanilla” OpenStack.
But what is “vanilla”? It could be a number of things:
Which immediately leads into the next problem: what is “OpenStack”? Which could also be a number of things[1]:
Until recently, officially the principle trademark “OpenStack-powered” meant Nova + Swift *only*
The de facto “baseline” set of commonly deployed OpenStack services
Nova, Keystone, Glance, Cinder, Horizon, and Neutron
There is no name or official stance on this arbitrary grouping
Use of DefCore + RefStack to test for OpenStack
UPDATE: to be more clear, the baseline set above *does* have a name. It is called “core” and called out in section 4.1 of the bylaws, which is below. I apologize for the confusion as “core” has been overloaded a fair bit in discussions on the board and at one point trademark rights were tied to “core”.
4.1 General Powers.
(a) The business and affairs of the Foundation shall be managed by or under the direction of a Board of Directors, who may exercise all of the powers of the Foundation except as otherwise provided by these Bylaws.
(b) The management of the technical matters relating to the OpenStack Project shall be managed by the Technical Committee. The management of the technical matters for the OpenStack Project is designed to be a technical meritocracy. The “OpenStack Project” shall consist of a “Core OpenStack Project,” library projects, gating projects and supporting projects. . The Core OpenStack Project means the software modules which are part of an integrated release and for which an OpenStack trademark may be used. The other modules which are part of the OpenStack Project, but not the Core OpenStack Project may not be identified using the OpenStack trademark except when distributed with the Core OpenStack Project. The role of the Board of Directors in the management of the OpenStack Project and the Core OpenStack Project are set forth in Section 4.13. On formation of the Foundation, the Core OpenStack Project is the Block Storage, Compute, Dashboard, Identity Service, Image Service, Networking, and Object Storage modules. The Secretary shall maintain a list of the modules in the Core OpenStack Project which shall be posted on the Foundation’s website.
So this is helpful, but still confusing. If, for example, you don’t ship Swift, which some OpenStack vendors do not, then technically you can’t call your product OpenStack-powered. HP’s public cloud and Rackspace’s public clouds, last I checked anyway, don’t use the identity service (Keystone), which also means that technically they can’t be “OpenStack-powered” either. A strict reading of this section also says that all projects that are in “integrated” status are also part of “core” and that you can’t identify “core” with an OpenStack trademark unless “core” is distributed together, which implies that if you don’t have Sahara, then you aren’t OpenStack. Which, of course makes no sense.
So my point still stands. There has been a disconnect between how OpenStack is packaged up by vendors, how the trademarks are used, and how integrated is defined and contrasted to “core”, etc.
This is why item #3 above is still in motion and is the intended replacement model for #1. You can find out more about DefCore’s work here.
Understanding The OpenStack Trademark and Its History
It’s not really a secret, but it’s deeply misunderstood: until the last few weeks, the Bylaws very specifically said that “OpenStack-powered” is Nova plus Swift. That’s it. No other projects were included in the definition. Technically, many folks who shipped an “OpenStack-powered” product without Swift were not actually legally allowed to use the trademark and brand. This was widely unenforced because the Board and Foundation knew the definitions were broken. Hence DefCore.
Also, the earliest deployments out there of OpenStack were Swift-only. Cloudscaling launched the first ever production deployment of OpenStack outside of Rackspace in January of 2011,