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
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
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
-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
-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:
@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
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
: [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
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
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
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
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.
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
13 matches
Mail list logo
