[OpenStack Foundation] The two types of interoperability

Russell Bryant rbryant at redhat.com
Thu Feb 6 23:36:23 UTC 2014

On 02/06/2014 05:21 PM, Boris Renski wrote:
> Interop is a good goal. However, I frankly don't see us ever achieving
> "total interoperability" by exclusively relying on trademark enforcement
> as leverage. 
> The only path I see currently towards the type of interop that would
> allow for workload federation across providers is if there was an
> upstream project, whereby various providers would proactively write and
> maintain connectors into a central auth system... kinda like an
> "openstack native rightscale." Those deploying openstack on-prem would
> then be able to leverage this module to federate on-prem environment
> with all the providers that have a functional driver. I.e. just like you
> have multiple storage provider drivers to cinder, we need services
> providers to write and maintain drivers against something in OpenStack.
> I've seen discussions and even blueprints on federated keystone in the
> past, but am not sure how much progress has been made... Thierry maybe
> you know more?
> I.e. there has to be a technology solution to back up administrative
> action. Not just trademarks and definitions. 
> Thoughts? 

Federation is interesting, too.  However, I think you can have what I
would consider total interop without federation.

As a user, I just want to be able to point my application at a different
cloud (with a different set of credentials) and have it work and behave
the same way.  There's no federation needed to achieve that.

The OpenStack project itself is a huge consumer of OpenStack clouds via
the infrastructure project.  They shouldn't have to do special casing
for which cloud they're talking to, yet they do.

Russell Bryant

More information about the Foundation mailing list