Open Stack

Hi Eugene,
Comments in-line.

On Thu, 2014-05-08 at 17:01 +0400, Eugene Nikanorov wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> 
> 
> My comments inline:
>         1. We shouldn't be looking at the current model and deciding
>         which object is the root object, or what object to rename as a
>         "loadbalancer"... That's totally backwards! *We don't define
>         which object is named the "loadbalancer" by looking for the
>         root object -- we define which object is the root by looking
>         for the object named "loadbalancer".* I had hoped that was
>         clear from the JSON examples in our API proposal, but I think
>         maybe there was too much focus on the object model chart,
>         where this isn't nearly as clearly communicated.
>         
>         
>         2. As I believe I have also said before, if I'm using "<X> as
>         a Service" then I expect to get back an object of type "<X>".
>         I would be very frustrated/confused if, as a user, LBaaS
>         returned me an object of type "VIP" when I POST a Create for
>         my new load balancer. On this last point, I feel like I've
>         said this enough times that I'm beating a dead horse...
>         
>         
> I think we definitely should be looking at existing API/BBG proposal
> for the root object.
> The question about whether we need additional 'Loadbalancer' resource
> or not is not a question about terminology, so (2) is not a valid
> argument.
> 
> 
> What really matters in answering the question about 'loadbalancer'
> resource is do we need multiple L2 ports per single loadbalancer. If
> we do - that could be a justification to add it. Right now the common
> perception is that this is not needed and hence, 'loadbalancer' is not
> required in the API or obj model.
Let me know if I am misunderstanding this,and please explain it
further. 
A single neutron port can have many fixed ips on many subnets.  Since
this is the case you're saying that there is no need for the API to
define multiple VIPs since a single neutron port can represent all the
IPs that all the VIPs require?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Eugene.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev