Open Stack

Excerpts from Joshua Harlow's message of 2016-06-21 15:12:09 -0700:
> Agreed, it appears supported right-now (whether intentional or not),
> 
> So the question at that point is what can we do to make it better...
> 
> I think we all agree that the config-drive probably shouldn't have the 
> equivalent of the metadata service in it; because if the metadata 
> service can change over time, and the config-drive can't then it's a bad 
> equivalent and that should be rectified, either by making it an 
> equivalent or making it be accepted that it is not, and ideally trimming 
> the data in it to not confuse people (ie by providing static networking 
> configuration only, and leaving the items that can be dynamic to the 
> dynamic metadata service).
> 
> Of course this whole mess IMHO gets into, 'why don't we just have an 
> agreed up agent that can be used'; because that's what the metadata 
> service is starting to become (a crappy version of an agent); but I digress.
> 

Not sure I agree with your initial stipulation. It shouldn't be a
surprise, at all, to any user, that an HTTP service is updated live,
while an ISO attached to an instance is kept static.