Comment 32 for bug 1349702

Igor,

How are the new fields different from these:

https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/89ef1c52e7d1626b4534e5c869b2e44e4d4a47af/nailgun/nailgun/fixtures/openstack.yaml#L897-L944

And how will changing the path turn nailgun code into pasta? I don't really understand. But handling this fields in UI the way they are implemented will add more hardcode to the UI code.

> Moreover, these setting are neutron only and shouldn't be shown for nova_network
Naturally solved with our restriction mechanism. With the current approach we should hardcode this condition in UI.

> While nova_network is going to be removed and we're able to hide settings based on network provider, I still think it's not ok to put network settings in different places
We already have lots of network settings in the cluster attributes - though they are currently shown on the network tab. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, please check out the latest master - in the last few days there were significant changes to the network and settings tab, and all the network-related settings are moved to the network tab.

> So could you please, Vitaly, show them on Network tab near the related settings?
Where exactly? In Neutron L2 or Neutron L3. If it's the new group, what's its name? How these should these fields should be validated?
With the current approach, we need to get answer to these questions and add some hardcode to the UI. If we use our common settings format, we can describe answers to all these questions declaratively.

I think since we implemented segmentation of the settings tab, we should discourage extending networking_parameters and eventually move everything from networking_parameters to the attributes.

If you still don't understand what I'm talking about, please check our the latest Fuel UI in fake mode.