Open Stack

[resend due to issues with our internal MTA]

Ed Leafe <ed at leafe.com> wrote: 
>The concept of “owning” particular traits isn’t in Placement. Rather, it is in the domain of the service that is using Placement. So any enforcement regarding which traits are acceptable has to be on the calling end, not in the Placement API. 

That feels like a slight jump in logic to me: the API can enforce 
ownership without being the authoritative source of truth for that 
ownership.  For example, as I just suggested elsewhere in this thread, 
(static) ownership of driver-provided traits could be tracked in 
os_traits.  Maybe that's a dumb idea; I'm not sure.

Having said that ... 

>So yeah, “do nothing”. 

I'm totally fine with this too ;-)  I only raised it because when I 
was developing the driver-owned capability traits code, people seemed 
somewhat concerned with the possibility of admins screwing things up. 
If the concern is minimal then I'm certainly not religious about adding 
extra safeguards.