Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-10 Thread Russell Bryant
On 07/10/2013 01:04 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Christopher Yeoh > wrote: > > Hi, > > The following is a list of API extensions for which there are no > plans to port. Please shout if you think any of them needs to be! >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-10 Thread Joe Gordon
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > Hi, > > The following is a list of API extensions for which there are no plans to > port. Please shout if you think any of them needs to be! > > baremetal_nodes.py > os_networks.py > networks_associate.py > os_tenant_networks.py > virtual

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-02 Thread David Kranz
On 07/02/2013 10:49 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: On 07/02/2013 07:24 AM, John Garbutt wrote: On 1 July 2013 15:49, Andrew Laski wrote: On 07/01/13 at 11:23am, Mauro S M Rodrigues wrote: One more though, about os-multiple-create: I was also thinking to remove it, I don't see any real advantage to

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-02 Thread Russell Bryant
On 07/02/2013 07:24 AM, John Garbutt wrote: > On 1 July 2013 15:49, Andrew Laski wrote: >> On 07/01/13 at 11:23am, Mauro S M Rodrigues wrote: >>> One more though, about os-multiple-create: I was also thinking to remove >>> it, I don't see any real advantage to use it since it doesn't offer any kin

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-02 Thread John Garbutt
On 1 July 2013 15:49, Andrew Laski wrote: > On 07/01/13 at 11:23am, Mauro S M Rodrigues wrote: >> One more though, about os-multiple-create: I was also thinking to remove >> it, I don't see any real advantage to use it since it doesn't offer any kind >> of flexibility like chose different flavors,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-01 Thread Christopher Yeoh
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Anne Gentle mailto:annegen...@justwriteclick.com";>> wrote: It's pretty rare to assign a doc team person to an API spec, typically the PTL works on it. We do have Diane Fleming on the doc team for API work and she's super knowledgeable and helpful. I have her wor

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-01 Thread Anne Gentle
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Anne Gentle < > annegen...@justwriteclick.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Anne Gentle < >>> annegen...@justwritecl

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-01 Thread David Kranz
I have used it. In the case where large numbers of instances are to be created, it (in theory) allows the compute system to optimize the request. It also avoids rate limit and other such issues that could come from hundreds of calls to create a server in sequence. -David On 07/01/2013 10:23

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-01 Thread Andrew Laski
On 07/01/13 at 11:23am, Mauro S M Rodrigues wrote: One more though, about os-multiple-create: I was also thinking to remove it, I don't see any real advantage to use it since it doesn't offer any kind of flexibility like chose different flavors, images and other attributes. So anyone creating m

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-01 Thread Mauro S M Rodrigues
One more though, about os-multiple-create: I was also thinking to remove it, I don't see any real advantage to use it since it doesn't offer any kind of flexibility like chose different flavors, images and other attributes. So anyone creating multiple servers would probably prefer an external a

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-01 Thread Christopher Yeoh
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Anne Gentle wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Anne Gentle < >> annegen...@justwriteclick.com> wrote: >>> >>> I was thinking of making sure it gets in the weekly newsletter and >>> asking t

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-01 Thread Anne Gentle
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Anne Gentle < > annegen...@justwriteclick.com> wrote: >> >> I was thinking of making sure it gets in the weekly newsletter and asking >> the user committee if they have ideas, plus Twitter. Another mailin

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-07-01 Thread Mauro S M Rodrigues
Correct if I'm wrong but what value ips core api bring to us currently? It offers you two calls: GET on http://localhost:8774/v3/servers//ips => returns instance ips GET on http://localhost:8774/v3/servers//ips/{network-id} => returns instance ips that are member of the specified networl. both

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-30 Thread lzy....@gmail.com
Hi Chris, thank you for the response. Replied by inline comments. On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > Hi Zhiyan, > > > On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 6:25 PM, lzy@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Christopher Yeoh >> wrote: > > >> >> Hi Chris, for "ext

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-30 Thread Christopher Yeoh
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Anne Gentle wrote: > > I was thinking of making sure it gets in the weekly newsletter and asking > the user committee if they have ideas, plus Twitter. Another mailing list > post may not be a different enough channel. > > I've made a blog post, tweeted it and ask

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-30 Thread Christopher Yeoh
Hi Zhiyan, On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 6:25 PM, lzy@gmail.com wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Christopher Yeoh > wrote: > > Hi Chris, for "extended_virtual_interfaces_net" extension, actually it > is based on 'virtual_interfaces', but I saw they are in different part > in NovaV3Exten

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-29 Thread Anne Gentle
Anne Gentle Content Stacker a...@openstack.org On Jun 29, 2013, at 3:26 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Anne Gentle > wrote: >> >> What does "no plans to port" mean for people already using Floating IPs and >> Cloudpipe via API extensions? Sounds like it cou

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-29 Thread lzy....@gmail.com
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > Hi, > > The following is a list of API extensions for which there are no plans to > port. Please shout if you think any of them needs to be! > > baremetal_nodes.py > os_networks.py > networks_associate.py > os_tenant_networks.py > virtual_

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-29 Thread Christopher Yeoh
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Anne Gentle wrote: > > What does "no plans to port" mean for people already using Floating IPs > and Cloudpipe via API extensions? Sounds like it could mean a couple of > things - > - these are becoming core and won't be an extension any more > - these won't be avai

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-29 Thread Christopher Yeoh
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Andrew Laski wrote: > cloudpipe.py > >> cloudpipe_update.py >> volumes.py >> > > For volumes.py, is this everything or just everything except the > os-volume_attachments portion? I think we still need that part. > > Thanks Andrew - that's exactly the kind of thing

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-28 Thread Anne Gentle
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > Hi, > > The following is a list of API extensions for which there are no plans to > port. Please shout if you think any of them needs to be! > What does "no plans to port" mean for people already using Floating IPs and Cloudpipe via API

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-28 Thread Russell Bryant
On 06/28/2013 03:46 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > On 06/28/13 at 10:01pm, Christopher Yeoh wrote: >> Hi, >> >> The following is a list of API extensions for which there are no plans to >> port. Please shout if you think any of them needs to be! >> >> baremetal_nodes.py >> os_networks.py >> networks_ass

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-28 Thread Andrew Laski
On 06/28/13 at 10:01pm, Christopher Yeoh wrote: Hi, The following is a list of API extensions for which there are no plans to port. Please shout if you think any of them needs to be! baremetal_nodes.py os_networks.py networks_associate.py os_tenant_networks.py virtual_interfaces.py createserver

[openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API extensions NOT to be ported to v3

2013-06-28 Thread Christopher Yeoh
Hi, The following is a list of API extensions for which there are no plans to port. Please shout if you think any of them needs to be! baremetal_nodes.py os_networks.py networks_associate.py os_tenant_networks.py virtual_interfaces.py createserverext.py floating_ip_dns.py floating_ip_pools.py flo