Open Stack

Jay,

I understand Justin's concern if we move /network and /images and /volume
to their own endpoints then it would be a change to the customer. I think
this could be solved by putting a proxy in front of each endpoint and
routing back to the appropriate service endpoint.

I added another image on the wiki page to describe what I'm trying to say.
http://wiki.openstack.org/api_transition

I think might not be as bad of a transition since the compute worker would
receive a request for a new compute node then it would proxy over to the
admin or public api of the network or volume node to request information.
It would work very similar to how the queues work now.

pvo

On 2/17/11 8:33 PM, "Jay Pipes" <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:

>Sorry, I don't view the proposed changes from AMQP to REST as being
>"customer facing API changes". Could you explain? These are internal
>interfaces, no?
>
>-jay
>
>On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Justin Santa Barbara
><justin at fathomdb.com> wrote:
>> An API is for life, not just for Cactus.
>> I agree that stability is important.  I don't see how we can claim to
>> deliver 'stability' when the plan is then immediately to destablize
>> everything with a very disruptive change soon after, including customer
>> facing API changes and massive internal re-architecting.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Justin Santa Barbara
>>> <justin at fathomdb.com> wrote:
>>> > Pulling volumes & images out into separate services (and moving from
>>> > AMQP to
>>> > REST) sounds like a huge breaking change, so if that is indeed the
>>>plan,
>>> > let's do that asap (i.e. Cactus).
>>>
>>> Sorry, I have to disagree with you here, Justin :)  The Cactus release
>>> is supposed to be about stability and the only features going into
>>> Cactus should be to achieve API parity of the OpenStack Compute API
>>> with the Rackspace Cloud Servers API. Doing such a huge change like
>>> moving communication from AMQP to HTTP for volume and network would be
>>> a change that would likely undermine the stability of the Cactus
>>> release severely.
>>>
>>> -jay
>>
>>



Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message (including any attached or
embedded documents) is intended for the exclusive and confidential use of the
individual or entity to which this message is addressed, and unless otherwise
expressly indicated, is confidential and privileged information of Rackspace.
Any dissemination, distribution or copying of the enclosed material is prohibited.
If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail
at abuse at rackspace.com, and delete the original message.
Your cooperation is appreciated.