John Purrier wrote:
Here is what we said on Feb 3 as the goal for Cactus:
*OpenStack Compute API completed. We need to complete a working set of
API's that are consistent and inclusive of all the exposed functionality . *
This was not reflected in the Cactus plan at:
Hello everyone,
As a reminder, our weekly team meeting will take place at 21:00 UTC
this Tuesday in #openstack-meeting on IRC.
Apart from usual items, we'll discuss the go/nogo for 2011.1.1 release
and python-novatools short term needs.
Check out how that time translates for *your* timezone:
Was just speaking with dabo about this and we agree that metadata is a bad name
for this capability.
I don't really care about what we call it, but metadata has some preconceived
notions/meanings. Perhaps Criteria?
Currently we have *some* criteria for creating a new instance on the Openstack
In case anyone is interested, I've put up the scripts I run from
Hudson to do my automated testing:
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~linux2go/nova/jenkins-config/files
Some of it is a series of more or less grotesque hacks, but it's been
hugely helpful in my stabilisation work.
The tests are
-Original Message-
From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
Sent: 28 February 2011 20:02
To: Ewan Mellor
Cc: Justin Santa Barbara; openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] How to deal with 'tangential' bugs?
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Ewan Mellor
pvo,
Yep. I'm responding to the slide having 3 services, 5 endpoints (nova,
glance, swift)
Since the number of endpoints will depend on deployment configuration.
And nova being a single repository doesn't mean it is a single service.
Jesse
On Mar 1, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Paul Voccio wrote:
We decided in the merge to call it Metadata, despite being fully aware of
the semantic issues, because that's what the CloudServers / OpenStack API
uses.
There are many better terms, but for the sake of avoiding a Tower of Babel,
let's just call it Metadata.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 6:56 AM,
Jesse -
Understood they are separate within nova. We're just having a semantic
disconnect which is my fault since I put the slides together in 3 min.
Rackspace defines a standard service as having a clear api boundary of rest
and optionally atom interfaces. In that model, nova is a service
Hi everyone,
I thought I'd take a moment to summarize the state of auth
in the various OpenStack projects. With the recent discussion
of OpenStack API auth in nova (bug+revert), how to structure
accounts/users/projects/etc., and with Glance and Burrow needing
auth solutions, now seems like a good
On a subject of authentication, I've always been puzzled why the token
isn't just set as a standard http cookie?
If it were, it would be dead simple to render a bit of HTML and
interact with the API directly from a web server. The EC2 API can't do
this because of the rather complex signature
2011/3/1 Eric Day e...@oddments.org:
Well, hopefully with a shared, modular service, we can add a token
module that uses cookies instead. :)
Sure :) I was just hoping to extract whatever wisdom might have been
behind the decision to seemingly reinvent the concept of cookies.
Perhaps there's
On 3/1/11 6:11 PM, Eric Day wrote:
[ ... trimmed ... ]
For the OpenStack API, we need something a bit different from what we
have today. We currently have no way of passing in a project name,
so I propose we add an entity element to the path name (just like
Swift does). For example, instead of
Won't putting this in the URL both:
1) Break CloudServers API compatibility (a total no-no)?
and
2) Preclude us from having e.g. multi-project queries (show me all my
servers in projects A and B)?
The options I see open to us are:
a) A cookie / header
b) A query parameter
c) Something in the
Hi Justin,
On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 05:14:42PM -0800, Justin Santa Barbara wrote:
However, what I don't understand is how I can query my servers in project1
and project2 (but not those in project3). *The only way I could see is
doing something like this:
If we're always going to pass the same user-id token (for a particular
user), what's the value in passing it at all? Why not get it from the
authentication token?
e.g. my X-Auth-Token could look like: justinsb project1,project2,project3
5OPr9UR2xk32K9ArAjO562e (i.e. my username, projects and a
Eric,
I think that¹s an interesting proposal. I think I'll try to put something
together to visual this.
pvo
On 3/1/11 8:14 PM, Eric Day e...@oddments.org wrote:
For that query you would, but not all. If you want to create a new
instance for project1 you would:
16 matches
Mail list logo
