Open Stack

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Randall Burt
<randall.burt at rackspace.com>wrote:

>
> On Nov 14, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Zane Bitter <zbitter at redhat.com>
>  wrote:
>
> > On 14/11/13 18:51, Randall Burt wrote:
> >>
> >> On Nov 14, 2013, at 11:30 AM, Christopher Armstrong
> >> <chris.armstrong at rackspace.com <mailto:chris.armstrong at rackspace.com>>
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Randall Burt
> >>> <randall.burt at rackspace.com <mailto:randall.burt at rackspace.com>>
> wrote:
> >>>    Regarding web hook execution and cool down, I think the response
> >>>    should be something like 307 if the hook is on cool down with an
> >>>    appropriate retry-after header.
> >
> > I strongly disagree with this even ignoring the security issue mentioned
> below. Being in the cooldown period is NOT an error, and the caller should
> absolutely NOT try again later - the request has been received and
> correctly acted upon (by doing nothing).
>
> But how do I know nothing was done? I may have very good reasons to
> re-scale outside of ceilometer or other mechanisms and absolutely SHOULD
> try again later.  As it stands, I have no way of knowing that my scaling
> action didn't happen without examining my physical resources. 307 is a
> legitimate response in these cases, but I'm certainly open to other
> suggestions.
>
>
I agree there should be a way to find out what happened, but in a way that
requires a more strongly authenticated request. My preference would be to
use an audit log system (I haven't been keeping up with the current
thoughts on the design for Heat's event/log API) that can be inspected via
API.


-- 
IRC: radix
Christopher Armstrong
Rackspace
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131114/1d12faf9/attachment.html>