Open Stack

Hi,

Thanks for putting it up Dmitry. I think the idea is fine too, I understand
that people may want to use in-band discovery for drivers like iLO or DRAC
and having those on a separated interface allow us to composite a driver to
do it (which is ur use case 2. ).

So, +1.

Lucas

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Imre Farkas <ifarkas at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 11/26/2014 02:20 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
>
>> Hi all!
>>
>> As our state machine and discovery discussion proceeds, I'd like to ask
>> your opinion on whether we need an IntrospectionInterface
>> (DiscoveryInterface?). Current proposal [1] suggests adding a method for
>> initiating a discovery to the ManagementInterface. IMO it's not 100%
>> correct, because:
>> 1. It's not management. We're not changing anything.
>> 2. I'm aware that some folks want to use discoverd-based discovery [2]
>> even for DRAC and ILO (e.g. for vendor-specific additions that can't be
>> implemented OOB).
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>> Dmitry.
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100951/
>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/135605/
>>
>>
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> I see the value in using the composability of our driver interfaces, so I
> vote for having a separate IntrospectionInterface. Otherwise we wouldn't
> allow users to use eg. the DRAC driver with an in-band but more powerful hw
> discovery.
>
> Imre
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20141128/708da9ca/attachment.html>