[openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.

Samuel Bercovici SamuelB at Radware.com
Mon Nov 18 08:09:23 UTC 2013

Eugene and Mark,

We get interest in the current OpenStack LBaaS solution.
Backward compatibility should be considered as part of any feature we add for icehouse.
I think that the any such BP should first address the best way to implement the feature (as Eugene did) but then also solve the backward compatibility issue as well.


From: Eugene Nikanorov [mailto:enikanorov at mirantis.com]
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 6:52 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Loadbalancer instance design.

> How do you plan to handle API compatibility?
The new API is not compatible and i think there was a consensus that such change is needed and incompatibility is justified.

> Is an extension for each (eg. add router_id to a loadblancer resource) necessary ?
Basically, yes, there should be an extension for each kind of binding with the exception that binding to providers is a part of lbaas API.


On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Itsuro ODA <oda at valinux.co.jp<mailto:oda at valinux.co.jp>> wrote:

> 2. Loadbalancer can be used to bind configuration to a provider, device, agent (host), router

What's the plan about this ?
Is an extension for each (eg. add router_id to a loadblancer resource) necessary ?

Itsuro Oda

On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 17:14:47 +0400
Eugene Nikanorov <enikanorov at mirantis.com<mailto:enikanorov at mirantis.com>> wrote:

> Hi folks,
> I've created a brief description of this feature.
> You can find it here:
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/LoadbalancerInstance<https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-service-instance>
> I would appreciate any comments/ideas about this.
> Thanks,
> Eugene.
Itsuro ODA <oda at valinux.co.jp<mailto:oda at valinux.co.jp>>

OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131118/5a376e51/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list