Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
Eugene and Mark, We get interest in the current OpenStack LBaaS solution. Backward compatibility should be considered as part of any feature we add for icehouse. I think that the any such BP should first address the best way to implement the feature (as Eugene did) but then also solve the backward compatibility issue as well. Thanks, -Sam. From: Eugene Nikanorov [mailto:enikano...@mirantis.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 6:52 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design. How do you plan to handle API compatibility? The new API is not compatible and i think there was a consensus that such change is needed and incompatibility is justified. Is an extension for each (eg. add router_id to a loadblancer resource) necessary ? Basically, yes, there should be an extension for each kind of binding with the exception that binding to providers is a part of lbaas API. Thanks, Eugene. On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Itsuro ODA o...@valinux.co.jpmailto:o...@valinux.co.jp wrote: Hi, 2. Loadbalancer can be used to bind configuration to a provider, device, agent (host), router What's the plan about this ? Is an extension for each (eg. add router_id to a loadblancer resource) necessary ? Thanks. Itsuro Oda On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 17:14:47 +0400 Eugene Nikanorov enikano...@mirantis.commailto:enikano...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstancehttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. Thanks, Eugene. -- Itsuro ODA o...@valinux.co.jpmailto:o...@valinux.co.jp ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 5:59 AM, Stephen Gran stephen.g...@theguardian.comwrote: On 15/11/13 13:14, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. This is great - we're starting to experiment with running an appliance load balancer as an openstack instance. The only quirk so far is that we need to add new vips to the allowed_addresses list on the neutron port, and the API for doing so doesn't allow for incremental updates, so is a bit racy. Why do you need incremental updates? Doing a PUT with a list of IP(cidr)/mac is not very expensive to the point were we need to create an address_pair as a top level resource so you could do what you are doing. FWIW, the allowed_address_pair attribute works the same way as the fixed_ips attribute on the port. Cheers, -- Stephen Gran Senior Systems Integrator - theguardian.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. -- Visit theguardian.com On your mobile, download the Guardian iPhone app theguardian.com/iphoneand our iPad edition theguardian.com/iPad Save up to 33% by subscribing to the Guardian and Observer - choose the papers you want and get full digital access. Visit subscribe.theguardian.com This e-mail and all attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender and delete the e-mail and all attachments immediately. Do not disclose the contents to another person. You may not use the information for any purpose, or store, or copy, it in any way. Guardian News Media Limited is not liable for any computer viruses or other material transmitted with or as part of this e-mail. You should employ virus checking software. Guardian News Media Limited A member of Guardian Media Group plc Registered Office PO Box 68164 Kings Place 90 York Way London N1P 2AP Registered in England Number 908396 -- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
I think we can discuss backward compatibility further. So the gist of the feature is that loadbalancer resource is introduced that should be created first and becomes the root object of the existing lbaas object graph. There could be 2 options of preserving API compatibility: 1) preserve it on Neutron level. Currently the root object is the Pool. So at Pool creation we'll also create underlying container, e.g. loadbalancer object. Of course it will be possible to create a Pool for existing loadbalancer providing its id. 2) preserve compatibility on python-neutronclient level. Client could combine calls for loadbalancer and pool creation, making it transparent for users (e.g. user creates a pool, loadbalancer is created b y the client, not by the Neutron) I prefer second option and that's why: - It leaves Neutron API clean. Also it will help to avoid lots of complications in the code. IMO just one that point justifies the approach. - It helps to achieve backward compatibility to cli consumers such as Horizon. What do you think? Thanks, Eugene. On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Aaron Rosen aro...@nicira.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 5:59 AM, Stephen Gran stephen.g...@theguardian.com wrote: On 15/11/13 13:14, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. This is great - we're starting to experiment with running an appliance load balancer as an openstack instance. The only quirk so far is that we need to add new vips to the allowed_addresses list on the neutron port, and the API for doing so doesn't allow for incremental updates, so is a bit racy. Why do you need incremental updates? Doing a PUT with a list of IP(cidr)/mac is not very expensive to the point were we need to create an address_pair as a top level resource so you could do what you are doing. FWIW, the allowed_address_pair attribute works the same way as the fixed_ips attribute on the port. Cheers, -- Stephen Gran Senior Systems Integrator - theguardian.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. -- Visit theguardian.com On your mobile, download the Guardian iPhone app theguardian.com/iphoneand our iPad edition theguardian.com/iPad Save up to 33% by subscribing to the Guardian and Observer - choose the papers you want and get full digital access. Visit subscribe.theguardian.com This e-mail and all attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender and delete the e-mail and all attachments immediately. Do not disclose the contents to another person. You may not use the information for any purpose, or store, or copy, it in any way. Guardian News Media Limited is not liable for any computer viruses or other material transmitted with or as part of this e-mail. You should employ virus checking software. Guardian News Media Limited A member of Guardian Media Group plc Registered Office PO Box 68164 Kings Place 90 York Way London N1P 2AP Registered in England Number 908396 -- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On 15/11/13 13:14, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. This does seem very similar to what Stackforge/Libra already does. Kind Regards - -- Andrew Hutchings - LinuxJedi - http://www.linuxjedi.co.uk/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSii69AAoJEJfFW8uxApB2WyoH/2KWwLn3p7imtgMpo7TDB9qU sc0OEcSjAMrQ68pf+kfVvY+/Di88TppBDsRTZ6gAG+YqRE6l9jd1cVFvRxPH602L muc+SBxXS5c4Aw1Q+yDKwSogj/SIWJXrCjrxoo2umxwm97FH0xqmYgdg/hpakESV f+o94/ZuiUueFkrO87Biypq/ybfjla1UBhcp3WcyYz26lZtQyblahIc8JY4qudP1 SMjc6fS1kJNJjilJJNGx7itE6M89639zE3T5zqGrviuXwE8xoqePbqwM4EISoBgM 9EMO/HwK4hRpSm+Z5VkG0txx/yVyj0fUjgVTNQ06sjCgV187A76DGeQMR5VPEzw= =0D0a -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hey Monty, On 18/11/13 15:17, Monty Taylor wrote: On 11/18/2013 07:14 AM, Andrew Hutchings wrote: Hi, On 15/11/13 13:14, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. This does seem very similar to what Stackforge/Libra already does. If they are similar, is there any chance the libra work can be leveraged? Very likely. I'm in the process of planning an open Libra LBaaS meeting in Seattle next month. I'm more than happy to help collaborate on ideas for that. Kind Regards - -- Andrew Hutchings - LinuxJedi - http://www.linuxjedi.co.uk/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSijDcAAoJEJfFW8uxApB2Z/QIAJE8Pb5bipN2ShRYVrSSzPlk h6DpEKjHGJTo6869Zr0f4RmVRutyNZoEWHuu8glfUm1Dnl3bmXpeQ2brBlAyIEPS F2vv3VsRK6mirXrRRVS/xYxHebOmHeltXFEmebPSPi+mYxte4r+NOh5hNHn3vBts qEPr1hT1FW6AQxAw+P1sVaHeiAh648nH1FJFFe2Pw5KmBtJwYJHZy+C7l/4bGzQt Ur1ZTZLPrvHusPQp1+jkhlW/1zK5i8dyOpwMBho9TBfbhQxL7rmgukG453aj2Cf6 1462tQOJA2LzKHOV+lVeeqEzNbvPejEJyknHW3GgYl+CwysCSqXo/AAsfIiGdgU= =wivP -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
Hi, I think that in the Atlas/Libra model loadbalancer is used in a similar way as the VIP object in Neutron/LBaaS. Regards, -Sam. -Original Message- From: Andrew Hutchings [mailto:and...@linuxjedi.co.uk] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 5:23 PM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design. -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hey Monty, On 18/11/13 15:17, Monty Taylor wrote: On 11/18/2013 07:14 AM, Andrew Hutchings wrote: Hi, On 15/11/13 13:14, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. This does seem very similar to what Stackforge/Libra already does. If they are similar, is there any chance the libra work can be leveraged? Very likely. I'm in the process of planning an open Libra LBaaS meeting in Seattle next month. I'm more than happy to help collaborate on ideas for that. Kind Regards - -- Andrew Hutchings - LinuxJedi - http://www.linuxjedi.co.uk/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSijDcAAoJEJfFW8uxApB2Z/QIAJE8Pb5bipN2ShRYVrSSzPlk h6DpEKjHGJTo6869Zr0f4RmVRutyNZoEWHuu8glfUm1Dnl3bmXpeQ2brBlAyIEPS F2vv3VsRK6mirXrRRVS/xYxHebOmHeltXFEmebPSPi+mYxte4r+NOh5hNHn3vBts qEPr1hT1FW6AQxAw+P1sVaHeiAh648nH1FJFFe2Pw5KmBtJwYJHZy+C7l/4bGzQt Ur1ZTZLPrvHusPQp1+jkhlW/1zK5i8dyOpwMBho9TBfbhQxL7rmgukG453aj2Cf6 1462tQOJA2LzKHOV+lVeeqEzNbvPejEJyknHW3GgYl+CwysCSqXo/AAsfIiGdgU= =wivP -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
Hi Eugene! Option #2 sounds good. A few Qs: I assume we would not need to roll the API version? Have there been any detailed proposals on the 'loadbalancer' CRUD operations? In particular, the ability to attach multiple VIPs as was discussed in Hong Kong. In general, I think the loadbalancer container is a good data model change and will help to make the API easier to use. Peter. From: Eugene Nikanorov [mailto:enikano...@mirantis.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 1:20 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design. I think we can discuss backward compatibility further. So the gist of the feature is that loadbalancer resource is introduced that should be created first and becomes the root object of the existing lbaas object graph. There could be 2 options of preserving API compatibility: 1) preserve it on Neutron level. Currently the root object is the Pool. So at Pool creation we'll also create underlying container, e.g. loadbalancer object. Of course it will be possible to create a Pool for existing loadbalancer providing its id. 2) preserve compatibility on python-neutronclient level. Client could combine calls for loadbalancer and pool creation, making it transparent for users (e.g. user creates a pool, loadbalancer is created b y the client, not by the Neutron) I prefer second option and that's why: - It leaves Neutron API clean. Also it will help to avoid lots of complications in the code. IMO just one that point justifies the approach. - It helps to achieve backward compatibility to cli consumers such as Horizon. What do you think? Thanks, Eugene. On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Aaron Rosen aro...@nicira.commailto:aro...@nicira.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 5:59 AM, Stephen Gran stephen.g...@theguardian.commailto:stephen.g...@theguardian.com wrote: On 15/11/13 13:14, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. This is great - we're starting to experiment with running an appliance load balancer as an openstack instance. The only quirk so far is that we need to add new vips to the allowed_addresses list on the neutron port, and the API for doing so doesn't allow for incremental updates, so is a bit racy. Why do you need incremental updates? Doing a PUT with a list of IP(cidr)/mac is not very expensive to the point were we need to create an address_pair as a top level resource so you could do what you are doing. FWIW, the allowed_address_pair attribute works the same way as the fixed_ips attribute on the port. Cheers, -- Stephen Gran Senior Systems Integrator - theguardian.comhttp://theguardian.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. -- Visit theguardian.comhttp://theguardian.com On your mobile, download the Guardian iPhone app theguardian.com/iphonehttp://theguardian.com/iphone and our iPad edition theguardian.com/iPadhttp://theguardian.com/iPad Save up to 33% by subscribing to the Guardian and Observer - choose the papers you want and get full digital access. Visit subscribe.theguardian.comhttp://subscribe.theguardian.com This e-mail and all attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender and delete the e-mail and all attachments immediately. Do not disclose the contents to another person. You may not use the information for any purpose, or store, or copy, it in any way. Guardian News Media Limited is not liable for any computer viruses or other material transmitted with or as part of this e-mail. You should employ virus checking software. Guardian News Media Limited A member of Guardian Media Group plc Registered Office PO Box 68164 Kings Place 90 York Way London N1P 2AP Registered in England Number 908396 -- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
Looks good Eugene! What about 'status' on the loadbalancer instance? This might be the aggregate of all the VIP statuses. (worst of VIP[0-N] ) Peter. From: Eugene Nikanorov [mailto:enikano...@mirantis.com] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 5:15 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List Subject: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design. Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstancehttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. Thanks, Eugene. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
At Fri, 15 Nov 2013 17:14:47 +0400, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstancehttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. How do you plan to handle API compatibility? I think that was a major part of the discussion at the design summit. -- IWAMOTO Toshihiro ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
Hi, 2. Loadbalancer can be used to bind configuration to a provider, device, agent (host), router What's the plan about this ? Is an extension for each (eg. add router_id to a loadblancer resource) necessary ? Thanks. Itsuro Oda On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 17:14:47 +0400 Eugene Nikanorov enikano...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstancehttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. Thanks, Eugene. -- Itsuro ODA o...@valinux.co.jp ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
How do you plan to handle API compatibility? The new API is not compatible and i think there was a consensus that such change is needed and incompatibility is justified. Is an extension for each (eg. add router_id to a loadblancer resource) necessary ? Basically, yes, there should be an extension for each kind of binding with the exception that binding to providers is a part of lbaas API. Thanks, Eugene. On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Itsuro ODA o...@valinux.co.jp wrote: Hi, 2. Loadbalancer can be used to bind configuration to a provider, device, agent (host), router What's the plan about this ? Is an extension for each (eg. add router_id to a loadblancer resource) necessary ? Thanks. Itsuro Oda On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 17:14:47 +0400 Eugene Nikanorov enikano...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. Thanks, Eugene. -- Itsuro ODA o...@valinux.co.jp ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstancehttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. Thanks, Eugene. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.
On 15/11/13 13:14, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: Hi folks, I've created a brief description of this feature. You can find it here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this. This is great - we're starting to experiment with running an appliance load balancer as an openstack instance. The only quirk so far is that we need to add new vips to the allowed_addresses list on the neutron port, and the API for doing so doesn't allow for incremental updates, so is a bit racy. Cheers, -- Stephen Gran Senior Systems Integrator - theguardian.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. -- Visit theguardian.com On your mobile, download the Guardian iPhone app theguardian.com/iphone and our iPad edition theguardian.com/iPad Save up to 33% by subscribing to the Guardian and Observer - choose the papers you want and get full digital access. Visit subscribe.theguardian.com This e-mail and all attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender and delete the e-mail and all attachments immediately. Do not disclose the contents to another person. You may not use the information for any purpose, or store, or copy, it in any way. Guardian News Media Limited is not liable for any computer viruses or other material transmitted with or as part of this e-mail. You should employ virus checking software. Guardian News Media Limited A member of Guardian Media Group plc Registered Office PO Box 68164 Kings Place 90 York Way London N1P 2AP Registered in England Number 908396 -- ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
