Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need an IntrospectionInterface?

2014-12-01 Thread Victor Lowther
+9001 for introspection

On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 9:40 PM, Shivanand Tendulker stendul...@gmail.com
wrote:

 +1 for  separate interface.

 --Shivanand

 On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes 
 lucasago...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,

 Thanks for putting it up Dmitry. I think the idea is fine too, I
 understand that people may want to use in-band discovery for drivers like
 iLO or DRAC and having those on a separated interface allow us to composite
 a driver to do it (which is ur use case 2. ).

 So, +1.

 Lucas

 On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Imre Farkas ifar...@redhat.com wrote:

 On 11/26/2014 02:20 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:

 Hi all!

 As our state machine and discovery discussion proceeds, I'd like to ask
 your opinion on whether we need an IntrospectionInterface
 (DiscoveryInterface?). Current proposal [1] suggests adding a method for
 initiating a discovery to the ManagementInterface. IMO it's not 100%
 correct, because:
 1. It's not management. We're not changing anything.
 2. I'm aware that some folks want to use discoverd-based discovery [2]
 even for DRAC and ILO (e.g. for vendor-specific additions that can't be
 implemented OOB).

 Any ideas?

 Dmitry.

 [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100951/
 [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135605/


 Hi Dmitry,

 I see the value in using the composability of our driver interfaces, so
 I vote for having a separate IntrospectionInterface. Otherwise we wouldn't
 allow users to use eg. the DRAC driver with an in-band but more powerful hw
 discovery.

 Imre


 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need an IntrospectionInterface?

2014-11-30 Thread Shivanand Tendulker
+1 for  separate interface.

--Shivanand

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes lucasago...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hi,

 Thanks for putting it up Dmitry. I think the idea is fine too, I
 understand that people may want to use in-band discovery for drivers like
 iLO or DRAC and having those on a separated interface allow us to composite
 a driver to do it (which is ur use case 2. ).

 So, +1.

 Lucas

 On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Imre Farkas ifar...@redhat.com wrote:

 On 11/26/2014 02:20 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:

 Hi all!

 As our state machine and discovery discussion proceeds, I'd like to ask
 your opinion on whether we need an IntrospectionInterface
 (DiscoveryInterface?). Current proposal [1] suggests adding a method for
 initiating a discovery to the ManagementInterface. IMO it's not 100%
 correct, because:
 1. It's not management. We're not changing anything.
 2. I'm aware that some folks want to use discoverd-based discovery [2]
 even for DRAC and ILO (e.g. for vendor-specific additions that can't be
 implemented OOB).

 Any ideas?

 Dmitry.

 [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100951/
 [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135605/


 Hi Dmitry,

 I see the value in using the composability of our driver interfaces, so I
 vote for having a separate IntrospectionInterface. Otherwise we wouldn't
 allow users to use eg. the DRAC driver with an in-band but more powerful hw
 discovery.

 Imre


 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need an IntrospectionInterface?

2014-11-29 Thread Ramakrishnan G
+1 for a separate interface.

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes lucasago...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hi,

 Thanks for putting it up Dmitry. I think the idea is fine too, I
 understand that people may want to use in-band discovery for drivers like
 iLO or DRAC and having those on a separated interface allow us to composite
 a driver to do it (which is ur use case 2. ).

 So, +1.

 Lucas

 On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Imre Farkas ifar...@redhat.com wrote:

 On 11/26/2014 02:20 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:

 Hi all!

 As our state machine and discovery discussion proceeds, I'd like to ask
 your opinion on whether we need an IntrospectionInterface
 (DiscoveryInterface?). Current proposal [1] suggests adding a method for
 initiating a discovery to the ManagementInterface. IMO it's not 100%
 correct, because:
 1. It's not management. We're not changing anything.
 2. I'm aware that some folks want to use discoverd-based discovery [2]
 even for DRAC and ILO (e.g. for vendor-specific additions that can't be
 implemented OOB).

 Any ideas?

 Dmitry.

 [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100951/
 [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135605/


 Hi Dmitry,

 I see the value in using the composability of our driver interfaces, so I
 vote for having a separate IntrospectionInterface. Otherwise we wouldn't
 allow users to use eg. the DRAC driver with an in-band but more powerful hw
 discovery.

 Imre


 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need an IntrospectionInterface?

2014-11-28 Thread Lucas Alvares Gomes
Hi,

Thanks for putting it up Dmitry. I think the idea is fine too, I understand
that people may want to use in-band discovery for drivers like iLO or DRAC
and having those on a separated interface allow us to composite a driver to
do it (which is ur use case 2. ).

So, +1.

Lucas

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Imre Farkas ifar...@redhat.com wrote:

 On 11/26/2014 02:20 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:

 Hi all!

 As our state machine and discovery discussion proceeds, I'd like to ask
 your opinion on whether we need an IntrospectionInterface
 (DiscoveryInterface?). Current proposal [1] suggests adding a method for
 initiating a discovery to the ManagementInterface. IMO it's not 100%
 correct, because:
 1. It's not management. We're not changing anything.
 2. I'm aware that some folks want to use discoverd-based discovery [2]
 even for DRAC and ILO (e.g. for vendor-specific additions that can't be
 implemented OOB).

 Any ideas?

 Dmitry.

 [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100951/
 [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135605/


 Hi Dmitry,

 I see the value in using the composability of our driver interfaces, so I
 vote for having a separate IntrospectionInterface. Otherwise we wouldn't
 allow users to use eg. the DRAC driver with an in-band but more powerful hw
 discovery.

 Imre


 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need an IntrospectionInterface?

2014-11-26 Thread Imre Farkas

On 11/26/2014 02:20 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:

Hi all!

As our state machine and discovery discussion proceeds, I'd like to ask
your opinion on whether we need an IntrospectionInterface
(DiscoveryInterface?). Current proposal [1] suggests adding a method for
initiating a discovery to the ManagementInterface. IMO it's not 100%
correct, because:
1. It's not management. We're not changing anything.
2. I'm aware that some folks want to use discoverd-based discovery [2]
even for DRAC and ILO (e.g. for vendor-specific additions that can't be
implemented OOB).

Any ideas?

Dmitry.

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100951/
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135605/



Hi Dmitry,

I see the value in using the composability of our driver interfaces, so 
I vote for having a separate IntrospectionInterface. Otherwise we 
wouldn't allow users to use eg. the DRAC driver with an in-band but more 
powerful hw discovery.


Imre


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev