On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 16:11 -0800, Stephen Balukoff wrote:
> * This seems less ambiguous from a terminology perspective. The
> name 'VIP' in other contexts means 'virtual IP address', which
> is the same thing as a floating IP, which in other contexts is
> usually con
Stephen,
> Aah, Ok. FWIW, splitting up the VIP into instance/"floating IP entity"
Right now I'm not sure what would be the best. Currently we don't have
implementation that allows creating VIP on external network directly. For
example, when haproxy VIP is created, it has address on the tenant netw
Hi Eugene,
Aah, Ok. FWIW, splitting up the VIP into instance/"floating IP entity"
separate from listener (ie. carries most of the attributes of VIP, in
current implementation) still allows us to ensure tenants don't end up
accidentally sharing an IP address. The "instance" could be associated with
Hi,
see my comments inline:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Stephen Balukoff wrote:
>
>
> Is this blueprint not yet implemented? When I attempt to create multiple
> VIPs using the same IP in my test cluster, I get:
>
> sbalukoff@testbox:~$ neutron lb-vip-create --name test-vip2
> --protocol-p
Hello!
This e-mail is concerning the "Multiple load balanced services per floating
IP" feature:
Sam, I think you said:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Samuel Bercovici wrote:
>
> ยท Multiple load balanced services per floating IP - You can
> already multiple VIPs using the same IP
