Bug 1042418

Summary: [RFE][neutron]: Quantum QoS API extension and DB models
Product: Red Hat OpenStack Reporter: RHOS Integration <rhos-integ>
Component: openstack-neutronAssignee: RHOS Maint <rhos-maint>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Ofer Blaut <oblaut>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: unspecifiedCC: chrisw, lpeer, markmc, nyechiel, yeylon
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
URL: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/quantum-qos-api-db
Whiteboard: upstream_milestone_next upstream_status_needs-code-review upstream_definition_superseded
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-03-19 10:31:28 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description RHOS Integration 2013-12-12 22:12:50 UTC 
Cloned from launchpad blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/quantum-qos-api-db.

Description:

This blueprint will cover the QoS API and database models.

The "policy" column will store a JSON object that specifies the
action to be taken - it's sort of a hack - better suggestions appreciated - but the idea is that the action column could contain all the different types of QoS mechanisms that vendors use.

Possible examples for the policy column in the qos table:

{"action": {"mark": "af32"}}

{"action": {"ratelimit": "100kbps"}}

The model has many similarities with the NVP QoS DB models, so the goal will be to refactor the NVP QoS to use these models, and place the NVP QoS specific attributes inside the JSON object.

Specification URL (additional information):

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGUqEb4CEdabbTDyeL2ECVicnBRNrK3amJcNi-D4Ffo/edit
Comment 2 Stephen Gordon 2014-02-06 14:08:36 UTC 
Updating based on BP milestone
Comment 3 Nir Yechiel 2014-03-04 10:40:46 UTC 
Updating based on upsream status
Comment 4 lpeer 2015-03-19 10:31:28 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1042406 ***