[openstack-dev] Rackspace Plans Contributions to HEAT
robertc at robertcollins.net
Thu Apr 4 18:47:28 UTC 2013
On 5 April 2013 04:43, Alan Kavanagh <alan.kavanagh at ericsson.com> wrote:
> I can see understand your point but we need to separate the case for
> Auto-Scaling into two cases as follows: (1) for Network Services that are
> inherent and part of the Openstack IaaS system (for example LB) and (2) for
> application that sit on top and can be provisioned through the HEAT API for
> example (this I can see as a good use of HEAT).
You say that we need to separate it, but you don't say why.
This intruiges me, since the triple-o (openstack [deployed by and] on
openstack) project's entire focus is being able to deploy all of
Openstack using Heat. So network services like load balancers will sit
within the the bare metal layer cloud and be managed via Heat.
To me that means either a) you know something we don't, and we're
doomed to failure, or b) there is no need to separate auto scaling
into the (1) and (2) you mention.
Can you help me understand why you say we need to separate auto
scaling into two cases?
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
HP Cloud Services
More information about the OpenStack-dev