<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#008800;background:#DDFFDD">Vipsniassociations table:
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Line 147 in last patch of the document<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Vijay Venkatachalam [mailto:Vijay.Venkatachalam@citrix.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:17 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Should TLS settings for listener be set through separate API/model?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">>>SNI list is managed by separate entity<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">What is this entity?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> Evgeny Fedoruk [<a href="mailto:EvgenyF@Radware.com">mailto:EvgenyF@Radware.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 24, 2014 12:25 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Should TLS settings for listener be set through separate API/model?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">+1 for option 1. SNI list is managed by separate entity, default TLS container is part of a listener object. It will have None value when listener does not
offloads TLS.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Managing another entity for 1:0-1 relationship just for future use seems not right to me. Breaking TLS settings apart from listener can be done when needed,
if needed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Evg<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Stephen Balukoff [<a href="mailto:sbalukoff@bluebox.net">mailto:sbalukoff@bluebox.net</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:26 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Should TLS settings for listener be set through separate API/model?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ok, so we've got opinions on both sides of the argument here. I'm actually pretty ambivalent about it. Do others have strong opinions on this?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Doug Wiegley <<a href="mailto:dougw@a10networks.com" target="_blank">dougw@a10networks.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Put me down for being in favor of option 1.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">A single attribute in a 1:1 relationship? Putting that in a new table sounds like premature optimization to me; design the database change for the future feature
when you can see the spec for it.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Doug<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Stephen Balukoff <<a href="mailto:sbalukoff@bluebox.net" target="_blank">sbalukoff@bluebox.net</a>><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b>"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <<a href="mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, June 23, 2014 at 5:25 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <<a href="mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Should TLS settings for listener be set through separate API/model?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Also to add to pros for 2:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">* Keeping the TLS stuff contained to its own objects means we can have separate development resources on each and not worry as much about overlapping domains.
(TLS-related knowledge and knowledge of dealing with TCP / UDP listeners are separate knowledge domains. Or at least, the former is a more specialized subset of the latter.)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Note that what we're proposing means there's essentially a 1:0-1 relationship between Listener and this new yet-to-be-named object. (0 in case the Listener is
not terminating TLS.)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Stephen<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Brandon Logan <<a href="mailto:brandon.logan@rackspace.com" target="_blank">brandon.logan@rackspace.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Whoops, [Neutron][LBaaS] got taken out of the subject line here.<br>
Putting it back in.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><br>
On Mon, 2014-06-23 at 21:10 +0000, Brandon Logan wrote:<br>
> Okay so we've talked a bit about this in IRC and now I'm sending this<br>
> out as an update. Here are the options with pros and cons that have<br>
> come from that discussion.<br>
><br>
> 1) default_certificate_id is an attribute of the Listener object.<br>
><br>
> Pros:<br>
> -No extra entity needed<br>
><br>
> Cons:<br>
> -May bloat Listener object when more attributes are needed for only TLS<br>
> termination. Sounds like TLS version and cipher selection will be<br>
> needed attributes in the future.<br>
><br>
><br>
> 2) A separate TLS Entity is created that is referenced by the Listener<br>
> object. This entity at first may only contain a certificate_id that<br>
> references barbican. Name and description can be allowed as well.<br>
><br>
> Pros:<br>
> -TLS domain specific attributes contained in its own entity<br>
> -Future attributes would just be added to this entity and not bloat the<br>
> Listener object.<br>
><br>
> Cons:<br>
> -It's another entity<br>
><br>
> In IRC we (sbalukoff, myself) seemed to agree option 2 is right way to<br>
> go. Anyone agree or disagree?<br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
> Brandon<br>
><br>
> On Mon, 2014-06-23 at 12:15 -0700, Stephen Balukoff wrote:<br>
> > The separate entity makes sense for certificates participating in an<br>
> > SNI configuration, but probably not so much for the 'default'<br>
> > certificate used when TLS is being terminated.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Vijay: You're also right that other TLS-related attributes will<br>
> > probably get added to the Listener object. This probably makes sense<br>
> > if they apply to the Listener object as a whole. (This includes things<br>
> > like TLS version and cipher selection.)<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > I don't see much of a point in creating a separate object to contain<br>
> > these fields, since it would have a 1:1 relationship with the<br>
> > Listener. It's true that for non-TLS-terminated Listeners, these<br>
> > fields wouldn't be used, but isn't that already the case in many other<br>
> > objects (not just in the Neutron LBaaS sub project)?<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Thanks,<br>
> > Stephen<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Brandon Logan<br>
> > <<a href="mailto:brandon.logan@rackspace.com" target="_blank">brandon.logan@rackspace.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> > Vijay,<br>
> > I think the separate entity is still going to happen. I don't<br>
> > think it<br>
> > has remvoed. Or that is may just be my assumption.<br>
> ><br>
> > Thanks,<br>
> > Brandon<br>
> ><br>
> > On Mon, 2014-06-23 at 15:59 +0000, Vijay Venkatachalam wrote:<br>
> > > Hi:<br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > In the “LBaaS TLS termination capability specification”<br>
> > proposal<br>
> > ><br>
> > > <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98640/" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98640/</a><br>
> > ><br>
> > > TLS settings like default certificate container id and SNI<br>
> > cert list are part of the listener properties.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > I think it is better to have this as a separate entity so<br>
> > that the listener properties are clean and is not “corrupted”<br>
> > with TLS settings.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > I liked the original SSL proposal better where TLS settings<br>
> > was a separate entity.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > It is just 2 properties now but in future the TLS settings<br>
> > would grow and if we are going to introduce a TLS<br>
> > profile/params/settings entity later, it is better to do it<br>
> > now (albeit with min properties).<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Thanks,<br>
> > > Vijay V.<br>
> ><br>
> > > _______________________________________________<br>
> > > OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
> > > <a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
> > ><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>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">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>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > --<br>
> > Stephen Balukoff<br>
> > Blue Box Group, LLC<br>
> > <a href="tel:%28800%29613-4305%20x807" target="_blank">(800)613-4305 x807</a><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">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>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">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>
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">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><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><br>
<br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">--
<br>
Stephen Balukoff <br>
Blue Box Group, LLC <br>
<a href="tel:%28800%29613-4305%20x807" target="_blank">(800)613-4305 x807</a> <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
Stephen Balukoff <br>
Blue Box Group, LLC <br>
(800)613-4305 x807 <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>