Open Stack

Hi all, 
there is a project for DNS already DNSaaS (DNS as a service)

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Designate

 
On Feb 3, 2014, at 4:35 PM, Joshua Harlow <harlowja at yahoo-inc.com> wrote:

> Do most systems have access to a dns system that can be used to check? Maybe that could be one of these plugins.
> 
> From: Craig J <craig.jellick at gmail.com>
> Date: Monday, February 3, 2014 at 1:58 PM
> To: Joel Cooklin <joel.cooklin at gmail.com>
> Cc: "openstack at lists.openstack.org" <openstack at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] nova unique name generator middleware
> 
>> There's currently a check in nova for max length. It's hard coded to 255. Easy low-hanging fruit would be to make that number configurable and add a configurable regex check on the server name.
>> 
>> The uniqueness check could be trickier: checking the nova db wouldn't be sufficient in many cases as most people need to check some external system(s). Maybe we could put together something pluggable with a nova-db check as an example. Is a wsgi filter the most appropriate place for such a pluggable validator or should it be deeper, at the same place where the other server name validation occurs?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 6:46 AM, Joel Cooklin <joel.cooklin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>Shouldn't "nova list" and some shell script magic do most of this?
>>> 
>>> For our use case this won't work as well since several business units
>>> (tenants) make direct use of the APIs.  It's hard to enforce that they
>>> use our wrappers and the like.  It would be much more convenient in
>>> our case if we could enforce business logic via a plugin for all
>>> requests regardless of the client being used to access the API.
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 11:48 PM, Aryeh Friedman
>>> <aryeh.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Shouldn't "nova list" and some shell script magic do most of this?  The only
>>> > problem would be to make sure that two people didn't ask for a name at the
>>> > same time
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Tim Bell <Tim.Bell at cern.ch> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > -----Original Message-----
>>> >> > From: John Griffith [mailto:john.griffith at solidfire.com]
>>> >> > Sent: 03 February 2014 03:47
>>> >> > To: Joel Cooklin
>>> >> > Cc: openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >> > Subject: Re: [Openstack] nova unique name generator middleware
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Joel Cooklin <joel.cooklin at gmail.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> > > +1 intel use cases.  It would be nice to avoid our current custom
>>> >> > > patches.
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > On Sunday, February 2, 2014, Joshua Harlow <harlowja at yahoo-inc.com>
>>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> +1 yahoo use case(s) would also benefit from not having to patch the
>>> >> > >> +code
>>> >> > >> to achieve similar results.
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> Sent from my really tiny device...
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> > On Feb 2, 2014, at 12:12 AM, "Tim Bell" <Tim.Bell at cern.ch> wrote:
>>> >> > >> >
>>> >> > >> > It would be interesting to have a formal exit inside OpenStack nova
>>> >> > >> > at VM creation for this sort of check rather than having to patch
>>> >> > >> > the code.
>>> >> > >> >
>>> >> > >> > Other scenarios that I've seen is where there is a need to enforce
>>> >> > >> > limits as the server name is used for other purposes. Examples are
>>> >> > >> > characters in the server name or maximum length.
>>> >> > >> >
>>> >> > >> > Tim
>>> >> > >> >
>>> >> ...
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > Maybe just an auto-naming option added to nova's existing boot call; use
>>> >> > a prefix and the UUID of the instance would satisfy the
>>> >> > cases people are talking about here and not impact existing users?
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> We have a set of other use cases which are around the use of the server
>>> >> name to get a Kerberos/X.509 identity which imposes other restrictions on
>>> >> the name being chosen (such as maximum length and limited set of
>>> >> characters). The unique name is one scenario but there are others.
>>> >>
>>> >> Thus, we could start adding new options such as "max server name length"
>>> >> and "server name character set" or we find a way to do a plugin.
>>> >>
>>> >> Tim
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Mailing list:
>>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> >> Unsubscribe :
>>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
>>> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>> 
> !DSPAM:1,52f02aa2292318724815022!
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> 
> 
> !DSPAM:1,52f02aa2292318724815022!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20140203/4d3cb843/attachment.html>