On Nov 15, 2012, at 9:02 PM, Vijay Venkatachalam <vijay.venkatacha...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Simple answer yes, any LB device could do this. > > It should be done in 2 parts > > The open source loadbalancer part, where the loadbalancer have to be > modified, for example, to monitor for autoscaling purposes ( in addition to > the regular health monitoring). Isn't your code making use of Netscaler specific API calls ? Any LB would need to implement these same calls right ? -Sebastien > > The cloudstack part, in the loadbalancer's resource (in cloudstack), > translate the autoscale config to the config which the open source > loadbalancer can understand. > > Thanks, > Vijay V. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 1:02 AM >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Integrating autoscale branch to master? >> >> >> On Nov 15, 2012, at 5:44 PM, Ram Ganesh <ram.gan...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >>> Any thoughts? Unless we hear otherwise would like to push the patches. >> This feature had been code complete for a very long time. If there are still >> concerns/opinions let us know and we can take steps to correct them. >>> >> >> Ram, any thoughts on how this could work without Netscaler ? Any >> alternative open source load balancer we could use to implement this ? >> >> -Sebastien >> >>> Thanks, >>> Ram >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Ram Ganesh [mailto:ram.gan...@citrix.com] >>>> Sent: 15 November 2012 07:09 >>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>> Subject: RE: Integrating autoscale branch to master? >>>> >>>> David, >>>> >>>> Can we go ahead with merge of AutoScale code into master? Are there >>>> any more open questions? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Ram >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Vijay Venkatachalam [mailto:vijay.venkatacha...@citrix.com] >>>>> Sent: 13 November 2012 12:34 >>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>> Subject: RE: Integrating autoscale branch to master? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> My replies inline >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Vijay V. >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us] >>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7:42 PM >>>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>> Subject: Re: Integrating autoscale branch to master? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Vijay Venkatachalam >>>>>> <vijay.venkatacha...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Ok I will keep changes ready, and will merge once 4.0's news is >>>>> declared. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Vijay V. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Vijay, >>>>>> >>>>>> I haven't kept up with this recently so a couple of >>>>> questions/assumptions: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Autoscale code will require NetScaler libraries right? >>>>> >>>>> There are 2 parts to autoscale code. >>>>> A. AutoScale Manager and its services, This is part of the core. >>>>> And has no No Netscaler jar dependency; This part is coded like any >>>>> other NetworkServiceManager, meaning >>>> any >>>>> network >>>>> element can provide autoscale service. So this part does not have >>>>> compile time dependency with NetScaler jar. >>>>> >>>>> If an autoscale provider (which is most likely already an LB >>>>> provider) does not exist >>>>> in that network an error is thrown at run time. >>>>> So for all oss builds (where Netscaler is not packaged and cannot >>>> be >>>>> added >>>>> to the infrastructure) we should get a run-time error when >>>>> configuring autoscale. >>>>> >>>>> B. NetScaler Element and Netscaler Resource (which is part of >>>>> non-oss build today) >>>>> has been enhanced to provide autoscale capability. Today only >>>>> NetScaler does this, in future any network element can he >>>> enhanced >>>>> to provide autoscale. This part already has NetScaler jar >>>>> dependency >>>>> (and is considered non-oss today) and will continue to have >>>>> NetScaler >>>>> jar dependency. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> 2. Is autoscale functionality modular enough that we can turn >>>>> building it >>>>>> on/off at will? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Short Answer, No. >>>>> Since AutoScale is like an addon to LB there are touch- points. For >>>>> example, when a LoadBalancerRule is deleted the AutoScale entities >>>>> created for it also should be deleted, hence the dependency. >>>>> Basically there is code in LB core to delete autoscale entities on >>>> the >>>>> loadbalancer >>>>> rule's delete path. Hence Part (A.) could not be modularized. Is >>>> there >>>>> an alternative here? >>>>> >>>>> Also, in the UI autoscale will appear as part of LB to the user and >>>> if >>>>> he attempts to configure >>>>> AutoScale in a network which does not have NetScaler; he will get a >>>>> run-time error. >>>>> >>>>>> 3. Has there been any change to the netscaler java library >>>> licensing? >>>>>> I know there was work underway, but I never heard about a >>>> conclusion. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I am still chasing the legal team on this, but for the moment, we >>>>> should continue to treat NetScaler as non-oss. >>>>> >>>>>> --David >
