The contract we have is to maintain compatibility. As long as a client written for the AWS API continues to work, I don't think we are violating anything. Offering one API isn't a promise not to offer an alternative way to access the same information. On Sep 6, 2015 7:37 PM, "Sean M. Collins" <s...@coreitpro.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 04:25:43PM EDT, Kevin Benton wrote: > > So it's been pointed out that http://169.254.169.254/openstack is > completed > > OpenStack invented. I don't quite understand how that's not violating the > > contract you said we have with end users about EC2 compatibility under > the > > restriction of 'no new stuff'. > > I think that is a violation. I don't think that allows us to make more > changes, just because we've broken the contract once, so a second > infraction is less significant. > > > If we added an IPv6 endpoint that the metadata service listens on, it > would > > just be another place that non cloud-init clients don't know how to talk > > to. It's not going to break our compatibility with any clients that > connect > > to the IPv4 address. > > No, but if Amazon were to make a decision about how to implement IPv6 in > EC2 and how to make the Metadata API service work with IPv6 we'd be > supporting two implementations - the one we came up with and one for > supporting the way Amazon implemented it. > > -- > Sean M. Collins > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
