[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-101?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13694368#comment-13694368
 ] 

ASF subversion and git services commented on JCLOUDS-101:
---------------------------------------------------------

Commit 66f73e4e64992abd81c8a18eb0ccddd4f038248f in branch refs/heads/master 
from [~abayer]
[ 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-jclouds-labs.git;h=66f73e4 ]

JCLOUDS-101 - update joyent compute service to deal with SecurityGroupExtension

                
> 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

Reply via email to