[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-101?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13670555#comment-13670555
]
Andrew Bayer commented on JCLOUDS-101:
--------------------------------------
Yeah, I view that as part of the implementation of the abstraction.
> Add security group/firewall support to base ComputeService
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCLOUDS-101
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-101
> Project: jclouds
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: jclouds-compute, jclouds-core
> Reporter: Andrew Bayer
> Assignee: Andrew Bayer
> Fix For: 1.7.0
>
>
> Right now, we don't have an abstraction for dealing with security
> groups/firewalls across various compute APIs. As a result, code that needs to
> deal with said security groups/firewalls has to have implementations for each
> cloud it supports, which is...a pain, to say the least. While not all clouds
> have support for security groups or a similar concept, many do (at the very
> least, EC2, Nova and CloudStack all do, and CloudStack in fact has two
> different implementations depending on the network type), and this seems to
> be standard enough to merit a generic interface in the base ComputeService.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
