Open Stack

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:01:20PM -0400, Shamail wrote:
:> On Oct 9, 2015, at 12:28 PM, Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> wrote:
:> 
:>> On 10/09/2015 11:21 AM, Shamail wrote:
:>> 
:>> 
:>>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 10:39 AM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
:>>> 
:>>> It looks like some great conversation got going on the service catalog
:>>> standardization spec / discussion at the last cross project meeting.
:>>> Sorry I wasn't there to participate.
:>> Apologize if this is a question that has already been address but why can't we just leverage something like consul.io?
:> 
:> It's a good question and there have actually been some discussions about leveraging it on the backend. However, even if we did, we'd still need keystone to provide the multi-tenancy view on the subject. consul wasn't designed (quite correctly I think) to be a user-facing service for 50k users.
:> 
:> I think it would be an excellent backend.
:Thanks, that makes sense.  I agree that it might be a good backend but not the overall solution... I was bringing it up to ensure we consider existing options (where possible) and spend cycles on the unsolved bits.

As an operator I'd be happy to use SRV records to define endpoints,
though multiple regions could make that messy.

would we make subdomins per region or include region name in the
service name? 

_compute-regionone._tcp.example.com 
               -vs-
_compute._tcp.regionone.example.com

Also not all operators can controll their DNS to this level so it
couldn't be the only option.

Or are you talking about using an internal DNS implementation private
to the OpenStack Deployment?  I'm actually a bit less happy with that
idea.

-Jon