Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities

2014-08-06 Thread Vijay Venkatachalam
-Original Message- From: Brandon Logan [mailto:brandon.lo...@rackspace.commailto:brandon.lo...@rackspace.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:27 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities

2014-08-05 Thread Vijay Venkatachalam
Hi: I think we had some discussions around 'status' attribute earlier, I don't recollect the conclusion. Does it reflect the deployment status? Meaning, if the status of an entity is ACTIVE, the user has to infer that the entity is deployed successfully in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities

2014-08-05 Thread Brandon Logan
Hello Vijay! Well this is a hold over from v1, but the status is a provisioning status. So yes, when something is deployed successfully it should be ACTIVE. The exception to this is the member status, in that it's status can be INACTIVE if a health check fails. Now this will probably cause

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities

2014-08-05 Thread Eichberger, German
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities Hello Vijay! Well this is a hold over from v1, but the status is a provisioning status. So yes, when something is deployed successfully it should be ACTIVE. The exception to this is the member

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities

2014-08-05 Thread Brandon Logan
high bandwith to work all of that out. German -Original Message- From: Brandon Logan [mailto:brandon.lo...@rackspace.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:27 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities Hello

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities

2014-08-05 Thread Stephen Balukoff
- From: Brandon Logan [mailto:brandon.lo...@rackspace.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:27 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] status in entities Hello Vijay! Well this is a hold over from v1, but the status

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

2014-07-07 Thread Susanne Balle
: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Status of entities that do not exist in a driver backend +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

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

2014-07-07 Thread Mark McClain
On Jul 4, 2014, at 5:27 PM, Brandon Logan brandon.lo...@rackspace.com wrote: Hi German, That actually brings up another thing that needs to be done. There is no DELETED state. When an entity is deleted, it is deleted from the database. I'd prefer a DELETED state so that should be

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

2014-07-07 Thread Samuel Bercovici
) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Status of entities that do not exist in a driver backend On Jul 4, 2014, at 5:27 PM, Brandon Logan brandon.lo...@rackspace.com wrote: Hi German, That actually brings up another thing that needs to be done. There is no DELETED state. When

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

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

2014-07-07 Thread Brandon Logan
From: Jorge Miramontes [jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2014 12:02 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Status of entities that do not exist in a driver backend Hey Mark, To add, one reason we have

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

2014-07-04 Thread Brandon Logan
- From: Jorge Miramontes [mailto:jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 11:59 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Status of entities that do not exist in a driver backend +1 to QUEUED status

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

2014-07-03 Thread Brandon Logan
With the new API and object model refactor there have been some issues arising dealing with the status of entities. The main issue is that Listener, Pool, Member, and Health Monitor can exist independent of a Load Balancer. The Load Balancer is the entity that will contain the information about

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

2014-07-03 Thread Phillip Toohill
If the objects remain in 'PENDING_CREATE' until provisioned it would seem that the process got stuck in that status and may be in a bad state from user perspective. I like the idea of QUEUED or similar to reference that the object has been accepted but not provisioned. Phil On 7/3/14 10:28 AM,

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] Status of entities that do not exist in a driver backend

2014-07-03 Thread Eichberger, German
[mailto:jorge.miramon...@rackspace.com] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 11:59 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Status of entities that do not exist in a driver backend +1 to QUEUED status. For entities that have the concept of being