Open Stack

>Tim Bell wrote: 
>> As regards “Havana Keystone is not designated”, does this mean that I 
>> can have an OpenStack™ cloud without having a Keystone compatible API ? 

>I think that would be a cloud "powered by OpenStack™". 
>That would be correct for the current Havana DefCore capabilities.

+1 - we're limited to the API tests that we have available

>> If it is just the requirement for API compatibility, should this not be 
>> that it has no designated code. 

It's good to have designated code BUT not a vendor requirement. 

>> If it is actually not required, can the other components function fully 
>> without Keystone ? I would hope to be able to point a standard CLI such 
>> as nova at an OpenStack™ cloud and for it to work. 

We're limited to the available tests.  In this case, we're testing Tempest by proxy.  
Our goal is to encourage the community to expand coverage where there are
critical gaps.

> 
> This may reflect that some clouds have alternative identity 
> implementations but I am not aware if they are API compatible yet. 

> Perhaps this was discussed early on in the process, I don’t recall. But, we should make sure we put some clarity around it.

v3 had a lot of tests but did not make the cut because it was not stable in Havana.


> We should also proactively look at making Keystone code designated in 
> the future. 

+1 

> Rackspace, for instance, plans to move to running Keystone code in production for the public cloud as the way to support Keystone V3. The teams have been engaging to work through scaling concerns, etc. Hopefully that is a sign that things are moving in the right direction.

+1