On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Tim Fletcher <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for the quick replies. > > > > Keep in mind that Libcloud is by definition a lowest common denominator > > which means we need to sacrifice some not-so-common functionality to > > make an API which works with a lot of providers. > > That makes sense, I was naively thinking all the functionality could > be supported. > > > So if I understand you both correctly, I can subclass Member and not > worry about the IP addresses (they may be set, but doesn't matter as > that information won't be used by the API itself). The loadbalancer > subclass will use the server ids instead. > Correct. > > Then if we make the assumption that only one port will need to be open > then that problem disappears. Load balancing multiple ports is then an > edge case that isn't supported by libcloud. And if there are more > providers that support multiple ports in future then the API could > potentially be changed long term to support that. > Yep. > > All seems doable, i'll hopefully be able to implement this in the new > couple of weeks. > Don't forget about the tests and let us know if you get stuck and need help :) > > Cheers, > Tim >
