[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Weekly IRC Agenda

2014-08-13 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey LBaaS folks, This is you friendly reminder to provide any agenda items for tomorrow's weekly IRC meeting. Please add them to the agenda wiki == https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/LBaaS#Agenda. The agenda currently has these items: * Review the work items from the Hackathon and

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Weekly IRC Agenda

2014-08-20 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey LBaaS folks, This is you friendly reminder to provide any agenda items for tomorrow's weekly IRC meeting. Please add them to the agenda wiki == https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/LBaaS#Agenda. Cheers, --Jorge ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list

[openstack-dev] [Octavia] VM/Container Naming Issue

2014-09-05 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey guys, I just noticed that Amphora won the vote. I have several issues with this. 1) Amphora wasn't in the first list of items to vote on. I'm confused as to how it ended up in the final round. The fact that it did makes me feel like the first round of votes were totally disregarded. 2) The

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Mini-summit Interest?

2014-03-06 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hi everyone, I'd like to gauge everyone's interest in a possible mini-summit for Neturon LBaaS. If enough people are interested I'd be happy to try and set something up. The Designate team just had a productive mini-summit in Austin, TX and it was nice to have face-to-face conversations with

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Mini-summit Interest?

2014-03-13 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey everyone, Now that the thread has had enough time for people to reply it appears that the majority of people that vocalized their opinion are in favor of a mini-summit, preferably to occur in Atlanta days before the Openstack summit. There are concerns however, most notably the concern

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Requirements Wiki

2014-03-18 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Neutron LBaaS folks, Per last week's IRC meeting I have created a preliminary requirements use case wiki page. I requested adding such a page since there appears to be a lot of new interest in load balancing and feel that we need a structured way to align everyone's interest in the project.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Requirements Wiki

2014-03-19 Thread Jorge Miramontes
together! This will be really useful for LBaaS discussions. I updated the wiki to include L7 rules support and also marking already implemented requirements. Thanks, Oleg On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Jorge Miramontes jorge.miramon...@rackspace.commailto:jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Requirements Wiki

2014-03-20 Thread Jorge Miramontes
security feature. Is this controlling access to the VIP’s IP address or to pool members IP addresses? There is also a Firewall service in Neutron. Could this feature better fit in that service? Agree, it's better to utilize what fwaas has to offer. Eugene. Youcef From: Jorge Miramontes

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Requirements Wiki

2014-03-20 Thread Jorge Miramontes
The use case from our customers has been mostly for database (MySql) load balancing. If the master goes down then they want another master/slave on standby ready to receive traffic. In the simplest case, I think Neutron can achieve this with 2 pools with 1 node each. If pool #1 goes down then

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] addition to requirement wiki

2014-03-25 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Thanks Itsuro, Good requirement since Neutron LBaaS is an asynchronous API. Cheers, --Jorge On 3/24/14 7:27 PM, Itsuro ODA o...@valinux.co.jp wrote: Hi LBaaS developpers, I added 'Status Indication' to requirement Wiki. It may be independent from object model discussion but I think this is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Neutron LBaaS, Libra and managed services

2014-03-25 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Susanne, I think it makes sense to group drivers by each LB software. For example, there would be a driver for HAProxy, one for Citrix's Netscalar, one for Riverbed's Stingray, etc. One important aspect about Openstack that I don't want us to forget though is that a tenant should be able

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Weekly Standup Trial

2014-06-11 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Neutron LBaaS folks! I created the following etherpad in an effort to mitigate the visibility issue some of us have been trying to address. Please update it before tomorrow's weekly IRC meeting if possible so that the community is aware of what every team is currently engaged on. This will

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Consolidated metrics proposal

2014-06-12 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Andres, In my experience with usage gathering consolidating statistics at the root layer is usually a bad idea. The reason is that you lose potentially useful information once you consolidate data. When it comes to troubleshooting issues (such as billing) this lost information can cause

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Consolidated metrics proposal

2014-06-25 Thread Jorge Miramontes
or should I follow the “Requirements around statistics and billing” thread? Thank you! Andres From: Jorge Miramontes [mailto:jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 6:35 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Agenda for weekly IRC meeting

2014-07-02 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey LBaaS folks! Please send me any agenda items you would like discussed tomorrow so I can organize the meeting. And as usual, please update the weekly standup etherpad. Everything should be organized on the main wiki page now == https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS :) Cheers,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Layer7 Switching - L7 Rule - comapre_type values

2014-07-03 Thread Jorge Miramontes
I agree. Also, since we are planning on having two different API versions run in parallel the only driver that needs to be worked on initially is the reference implementation. I'm guessing we will have two reference implementations, one for v1 and one for v2. The v2 implementation currently

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Which entities need status

2014-07-03 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey German, We have similar statuses. I have been wanting to add a 'QUEUED' status however. The reason is that we currently use 'BUILD' which indicates active provisioning when in reality it is actually queued first and then provisioned. Thus, there are potential issues when trying to determine

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Status of entities that do not exist in a driver backend

2014-07-03 Thread Jorge Miramontes
+1 to QUEUED status. For entities that have the concept of being attached/detached why not have a 'DETACHED' status to indicate that the entity is not provisioned at all (i.e. The config is just stored in the DB). When it is attached during provisioning then we can set it to 'ACTIVE' or any of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Layer7 Switching - L7 Rule - comapre_type values

2014-07-03 Thread Jorge Miramontes
for certain drivers to hold other drivers hostage For some time there was a policy (openstack-wide) that public API should have a free open source implementation. In this sense open source driver may hold other drivers as hostages. Eugene. On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 10:37 PM, Jorge Miramontes

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Status of entities that do not exist in a driver backend

2014-07-07 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Mark, To add, one reason we have a DELETED status at Rackspace is that certain sub-resources are still relevant to our customers. For example, we have a usage sub-resource which reveals usage records for the load balancer. To illustrate, a user issues a DELETE on /loadbalancers/id but can

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Weekly IRC Meeting Agenda

2014-07-09 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hi LBaaS folks, This is your weekly friendly reminder to give me agenda items for tomorrow's meeting. Also please update the weekly standup document when you get a chance! Thanks! Current agenda items: * Paris summit talks (Susanne) * Reviews Cheers, --Jorge

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Milestone and Due Dates

2014-07-18 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Kyle (and anyone else that may know the answers to my questions), There are several blueprints that don't have Juno milestones attached to them and was wondering if we could assign them so the broader community is aware of the work the LBaaS folks are working on. These are the blueprints

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Weekly IRC Agenda

2014-07-23 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey LBaaS folks, This is you friendly reminder to provide any agenda items for tomorrow's weekly IRC meeting. The agenda currently has two items: * Review Updates * TLS work division Cheers, --Jorge P.S. Please don't forget to update the weekly standup ==

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Status and Expectations for Juno

2014-07-28 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Doug, In terms of taking a step backward from a user perspective I'm fine with making v1 the default. I think there was always the notion of supporting what v1 currently offers by making a config change. Thus, Horizon should still have all the support it had in Icehouse. I am a little worried

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Weekly IRC Agenda

2014-07-30 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey LBaaS folks, This is you friendly reminder to provide any agenda items for tomorrow's weekly IRC meeting. The agenda currently has these items: * Review Updates * Octavia Work Cheers, --Jorge P.S. Please don't forget to update the weekly standup ==

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Weekly IRC Agenda

2014-08-06 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey LBaaS folks, This is you friendly reminder to provide any agenda items for tomorrow's weekly IRC meeting. Please add them to the agenda wiki == https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/LBaaS#Agenda. The agenda currently has these items: * Review Updates Cheers, --Jorge P.S. Also,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Clarification in regards to https://docs.google.com/a/mirantis.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ar1FuMFYRhgadDVXZ25NM2NfbGtLTkR0TDFNUWJQUWc#gid=1

2014-04-09 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Answers inlined. Thanks for the questions! They forced me to think about certain features. Cheers, --Jorge From: Samuel Bercovici samu...@radware.commailto:samu...@radware.com Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Load balancing use cases and web ui screen captures

2014-04-11 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hi Kevin, We are trying to prioritize features based on actual data utilization. If you have some, by all means please add it to https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ar1FuMFYRhgadDVXZ25NM2NfbGtLTkR0TDFNUWJQUWc#gid=0. One reason we are focusing on HTTP(S) and not FTP is that 0.27% of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Requirements and API revision progress

2014-04-16 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hi all, In order to ease confusion I think I might create use case walk-throughs to show how the API would work. There's only been one week to work on this (minus other work) so I haven't had enough time to create them. I'll try to capture most of them in this form over the following week as I

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] SSL re-encryption scenario question

2014-04-18 Thread Jorge Miramontes
+1 for German's use cases. We need SSL re-encryption for decisions the load balancer needs to make at the l7 layer as well. Thanks Clint, for your thorough explanation from a security standpoint. Cheers, --Jorge On 4/18/14 1:38 PM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Excerpts from Stephen

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Thoughts on current process

2014-04-30 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey everyone, I agree that we need to be preparing for the summit. Using Google docs mixed with Openstack wiki works for me right now. I need to become more familiar the gerrit process and I agree with Samuel that it is not conducive to large design discussions. That being said I'd like to add my

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Thoughts on current process

2014-04-30 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Oops! Everywhere I said Samuel I meant Stephen. Sorry you both have SB as you initials so I got confused. :) Cheers, --Jorge On 4/30/14 5:17 PM, Jorge Miramontes jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com wrote: Hey everyone, I agree that we need to be preparing for the summit. Using Google docs mixed

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]Conforming to Open Stack API style in LBaaS

2014-04-30 Thread Jorge Miramontes
I agree it may be odd, but is that a strong argument? To me, following RESTful style/constructs is the main thing to consider. If people can specify everything in the parent resource then let them (i.e. single call). If they want to specify at a more granular level then let them do that too

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Thoughts on current process

2014-05-01 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Eugene, I think there is a misunderstanding on what iterative development means to you and me and I want to make sure we are on the same page. First of all, I'll try not to use the term duct-taping even though it's a widely used term in the industry. My main concern is that implementing

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]User Stories and sruvey

2014-05-01 Thread Jorge Miramontes
That sounds good to me. The only thing I would caution is that we have prioritized certain requirements (like HA and SSL Termination) and I want to ensure we use the survey to compliment what we have already mutually agreed upon. Thanks for spearheading this! Cheers, --Jorge From: Samuel

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Thoughts on current process

2014-05-01 Thread Jorge Miramontes
, 2014 3:10 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Thoughts on current process Hi, On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Jorge Miramontes jorge.miramon

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]User Stories and sruvey

2014-05-06 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Sam, I'm assuming you want one person from each company to answer correct? I'm pretty sure people in each organization will vote the same…at least I'd hope! Cheers, --Jorge From: Samuel Bercovici samu...@radware.commailto:samu...@radware.com Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]User Stories and sruvey

2014-05-06 Thread Jorge Miramontes
1:52 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 05/06/2014 02:42 PM, Jorge Miramontes wrote: Sam, I'm assuming you want one person from each company to answer correct? I'm pretty sure people in each organization will vote the sameŠat least I'd hope! I'd hope not! :) Even within the same

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS]User Stories and sruvey

2014-05-06 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Okay, makes sense to gather all data now and interpret this later. I'm too jaded for these types of debates right now since the summit is around the corner. Cheers, --Jorge On 5/6/14 3:32 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 05/06/2014 04:22 PM, Stephen Balukoff wrote: I think the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Subteam meeting Thursday, 05/08 14-00 UTC

2014-05-07 Thread Jorge Miramontes
All of our relevant material is in this Google Drive folder == https://drive.google.com/#folders/0B_x8_4x6DRLad1NZMjgyVFhqakU Cheers, --Jorge On 5/7/14 1:19 PM, Kyle Mestery mest...@noironetworks.com wrote: Lets go over the Rackspace portion of the API comparison tomorrow then, and we can

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Requirements around statistics and billing

2014-06-06 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Stephen, What we really care about are the following: - Inbound bandwidth (bytes) - Outbound bandwidth (bytes) - Instance Uptime (requires create/delete events) Just to note our current LBaaS implementation at Rackspace keeps track of when features are enabled/disabled. For example, we have

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-06 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey everyone, Per our IRC discussion yesterday I'd like to continue the discussion on how Barbican and Neutron LBaaS will interact. There are currently two ideas in play and both will work. If you have another idea please free to add it so that we may evaluate all the options relative to each

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-06 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas +1 for option 2. In addition as an additional safeguard, the LBaaS service could check with Barbican when failing to use an existing secret to see if the secret has changed (lazy detection). Youcef -Original Message- From: Jorge Miramontes

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-09 Thread Jorge Miramontes
have both. User's who like #2 juts hit the flag. Then the discussion changes to what we should implement first and I agree with Jorge + John that this should likely be #2. German -Original Message- From: Jorge Miramontes [mailto:jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com] Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 3

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS][Octavia] Usage Requirements

2014-10-15 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Hey Octavia folks! First off, yes, I'm still alive and kicking. :) I,d like to start a conversation on usage requirements and have a few suggestions. I advocate that, since we will be using TCP and HTTP/HTTPS based protocols, we inherently enable connection logging for load balancers for

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS][Octavia] Usage Requirements

2014-10-22 Thread Jorge Miramontes
:03 PM, Jorge Miramontes jorge.miramon...@rackspace.commailto:jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com wrote: Hey Octavia folks! First off, yes, I'm still alive and kicking. :) I,d like to start a conversation on usage requirements and have a few suggestions. I advocate that, since we will be using TCP

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS][Octavia] Usage Requirements

2014-10-23 Thread Jorge Miramontes
coming from logging. Some operators might choose to hook up very cheap and non performing disks which might not be able to deal with the log traffic. So I would suggest that there is some rate limiting on the log output to help with that. Thanks, German From: Jorge Miramontes [mailto:jorge.miramon

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS][Octavia] Usage Requirements

2014-10-27 Thread Jorge Miramontes
and non performing disks which might not be able to deal with the log traffic. So I would suggest that there is some rate limiting on the log output to help with that. Thanks, German From: Jorge Miramontes [mailto:jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 6:51 AM

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS][Octavia] Usage Requirements

2014-10-28 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Thanks for the reply Angus, DDoS attacks are definitely a concern we are trying to address here. My assumptions are based on a solution that is engineered for this type of thing. Are you more concerned with network I/O during a DoS attack or storing the logs? Under the idea I had, I wanted to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS][Octavia] Usage Requirements

2014-11-05 Thread Jorge Miramontes
would be happy to just move them on demand to a place the user can access. Thanks, German From: Jorge Miramontes [mailto:jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2014 8:20 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Object statuses

2015-01-23 Thread Jorge Miramontes
The example you put implicitly assigns the status tree to a load balancer. Is sharing only allowed for sub resources? Or can sub resources be shared across multiple load balancers? If that is the case then I suspect that statuses may be exposed in many different places correct? Cheers, --Jorge

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] adding lbaas core

2015-04-21 Thread Jorge Miramontes
I want to be friends with Phil :(. Congrats! Cheers, --Jorge On 4/21/15, 11:57 AM, Brandon Logan brandon.lo...@rackspace.com wrote: Welcome Phil! From: Doug Wiegley doug...@parksidesoftware.com Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:54 AM To: OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [octavia] Joining Neutron under the big tent

2015-05-01 Thread Jorge Miramontes
Good stuff. Thanks everyone for your hard work on getting Octavia to this point! Cheers, --Jorge From: Brandon Logan brandon.lo...@rackspace.commailto:brandon.lo...@rackspace.com Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)