<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi <span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;white-space:nowrap">Subrahmanyam,</span></div><div><span style="font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-weight:bold;white-space:nowrap"><br></span>The patch was originally implemented by Oleg Bondarev :)</div>
<div>> <span style="color:rgb(51,51,153);font-family:verdana,sans-serif">plugin-driver appears to be specific to driver provider</span></div><div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">That's correct</font></span></div>
<div><span style="color:rgb(51,51,153);font-family:verdana,sans-serif">> </span><span style="color:rgb(51,51,153);font-family:verdana,sans-serif">How does this work with single common agent and many providers?</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">The idea is that the plugin-driver is server-side logic which defines how neutron-server interacts with the device implementing LB. For example, haproxy plugin driver does it by communicating with lbaas-agent via rpc.</font></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">LBaas-agent has specific driver (device driver) that manages haproxy processes on the host.</font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">There could be other device drivers.</font></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">Using common agent is not required for a plugin-driver.</font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000"><br>
</font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">> </font></span><span style="color:rgb(51,51,153);font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Who owns the plugin driver?</span></div><div>
<span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">Usually it's vendor's responsibility to maintain their drivers.</font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000"><br>
</font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">Thanks,</font></span></div><div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font color="#000000">Eugene.</font></span></div></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Subrahmanyam Ongole <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:songole@oneconvergence.com" target="_blank">songole@oneconvergence.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#333399"><br></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#333399">I was going through the latest common agent patch from Eugene. plugin-driver appears to be specific to driver provider, for example haproxy has a plugin driver (in addition to agent driver). How does this work with single common agent and many providers? Would they need to use a separate topic?</div>
<div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,153)">Who owns the plugin driver? Is it appliance driver provider (such as f5/radware for example) or Openstack cloud service provider (such as Rackspace for example?)</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<br></font></span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">-- <br><br>Thanks<br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,153)">Subra</div>(Subrahmanyam Ongole)<br>
</font></span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>