Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-05 Thread Stephen Balukoff
2014 4:05 PM > > *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs > Distinction > > > > Hi Sam, > > > > So, If I understand you correctly, you don't think that speci

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-05 Thread Stephen Balukoff
ent switching) that have > members on the same subnet, no need to repeat the subnet information > > > > Regards, > > -Sam. > > > > > > > > *From:* Adam Harwell [mailto:adam.harw...@rackspace.com] > *Sent:* Saturday, May 03, 2014 10:17 AM

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-03 Thread Adam Harwell
stack.org>> Date: Friday, May 2, 2014 7:53 PM To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction Hi guys, Yep, so what I'm hearing is t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-02 Thread Stephen Balukoff
Hi guys, Yep, so what I'm hearing is that we should be able to assume that either all members in a single pool are adjacent (ie. layer-2 connected), or are routable from that subnet. Adam-- I could see it going either way with regard to how to communicate with members: If the particular device t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-02 Thread Eugene Nikanorov
Agree with Sam here, Moreover, i think it makes sense to leave subnet an attribute of the pool. Which would mean that members reside in that subnet or are available (routable) from this subnet, and LB should have a port on this subnet. Thanks, Eugene. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Samuel Berco

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-02 Thread Samuel Bercovici
I think that associating a VIP subnet and list of member subnets is a good choice. This is declaratively saying to where is the configuration expecting layer 2 proximity. The minimal would be the VIP subnet which in essence means the VIP and members are expected on the same subnet. Any member o

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-01 Thread Carlos Garza
On May 1, 2014, at 7:48 PM, Stephen Balukoff mailto:sbaluk...@bluebox.net>> wrote: Hi Trevor, I was the one who wrote that use case based on discussion that came out of the question I wrote the list last week about SSL re-encryption: Someone had stated that sometimes pool members are local,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-01 Thread Adam Harwell
2014 7:48 PM To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction Hi Trevor, I was the one who wrote that use case based on discussion that came

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Use-Cases with VPNs Distinction

2014-05-01 Thread Stephen Balukoff
Hi Trevor, I was the one who wrote that use case based on discussion that came out of the question I wrote the list last week about SSL re-encryption: Someone had stated that sometimes pool members are local, and sometimes they are hosts across the internet, accessible either through the usual de