Thanks Richard for the insight,
If we can support both Oauth and x509, keeping constructor backward compat with 
the last version. But not move to ARM because I agree with you it's not 
appropriate for libcloud. My understanding was that you should use oauth with 
the API in place of certs simply as a different authentication mechanism. 
 I'll submit a PoC PR this week for review
Sent from Outlook




On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 5:11 AM -0700, "Richard Conway" 
<rich...@elastacloud.com> wrote:










Couple of points (since I contributed to the original Azure compute driver)

1. The majority of users and enterprises using Azure are still using what 
Microsoft term "Classic" mode. This isn’t going away anytime soon although it 
is compounded by the fact that ARM and Classic are mutually exclusive such that 
you can't use "v1" with "v2" resources.
2. ARM itself is not a great fit for libcloud so it needs to be carefully 
thought about. It ties vnets, storage and compute together and makes certain 
things bound to one another (through ARM templates). In effect it does much of 
the job that you would be doing programmatically in libcloud.

That said it's probably worthwhile ADDING (not replacing) oauth through 
Microsoft and work and school accounts. Many people are still using 
.publishsettings files to generate X509 so a replacement would cause issues 
with many users current workflow. Microsoft, themselves, still support both 
through Powershell CmdLets with a Switch-Mode CmdLet (although this may be 
deprecated soon in favor of something simpler).

Cheers,

Richard

-----Original Message-----
From: anthony shaw [mailto:anthony.p.s...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 11:13 PM
To: dev@libcloud.apache.org; dev 
Subject: Re: [dev] Re: suggestions for 0.20.0

Wrt item 1, we wouldn't need to add it as a dependency, you can just use the 
requests library to get the token for oauth. That's all they are doing. And 
their SDK looks pretty incomplete so it wouldn't be a good dependency. I'm 
happy to do that task, I've got lots of accounts on azure to test on and plenty 
of VMs. It's probably time I contributed to another driver!
Wrt the backup, I'll send a comparison of the features in azure, Rackspace and 
dimension data to help with a base class. I'd got that somewhere anyway from 
prior research building our own service. I would imagine some of the other 
providers have also. Ant

Sent from Outlook




On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 2:34 PM -0700, "Tomaz Muraus"  wrote:










All good stuff.

1. As far as depending on the 3rd party libraries / packages goes - in the past 
we avoided that because it's harder to test it and make sure it works under all 
the Python versions we support.

2. Introducing a new API usually requires more work which includes a proposal 
to the mailing list and a prototype / initial implementation with at least 2 
drivers (3 are better).

The reason for at least 2 drivers is to make sure that the base API and 
implementation is indeed generic (as much as possible) and not biased towards a 
single provider...

3. Yeah, some cleaning is in order. Would be good to check which providers are 
now dead and remove those drivers (HP just announced sun set of their public 
cloud offering so in a couple of months we can get rid of that driver as well).

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:50 AM, anthony shaw
wrote:

> WRT item 1)
>
> Microsoft have already implemented this approach in the 
> azure-python-sdk pypi.
>
>
> https://azure-sdk-for-python.readthedocs.org/en/latest/resourcemanagem
> entauthentication.html
>
>
> Ant
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 10:37 AM, anthony shaw
> wrote:
>
> > I had some suggestions for the next version,
> >
> >
> > 1) Azure Driver:
> >  * Only supports the 'old' way of authenticating, continue this 
> > method
> >  * Offer the new Azure AD/OAuth method as a secondary option for 
> > instantiating a driver - 
> > https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/azure/ee460782.aspx
> > This is Microsoft's recommended approach and it's probably a matter 
> > of time until they stop supporting certificates (according to an 'insider').
> >
> > 2) A Backup Driver type:
> >
> > I'm looking at adding support for the DD Cloud Backup service and it 
> > doesn't really fall under the compute functionality. There are a few
> other
> > providers offering very similar functionality on the market
> >
> > Azure
> > Rackspace
> > Dimension Data
> >
> > https://developer.rackspace.com/docs/cloud-backup/v1/developer-guide
> > /
> > Azure
> > https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/backup/
> >
> > This would be very similar to the DNS driver type.
> >
> > 3) Removing the opsource driver, this is superseded by the Dimension 
> > Data driver and has been for a while now.
> >
> > Ant
> >
>

Reply via email to