Thanks. Can you add the actual API parameters? Otherwise, LGTM. On 1/15/13 3:55 AM, "Murali Reddy" <murali.re...@citrix.com> wrote:
>I have update the FS [1] as per the review comments. Changes done are >included in document history section. > >I would like to seek comments on one change added in FS. In CloudStak, at >present there are no operations that require orchestration across zones. >GSLB and EIP across zones [2] are two immediate features that require >cross-zone orchestration. I would like to introduce notion of 'region' >level services and corresponding service provider in to CloudStack. Please >share your thoughts. > >[1] >https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/GSLB+(Global+Server >+ >Load+Balancing)+Functional+specification+and+Design+Document > >[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-652 > > >On 11/01/13 2:32 PM, "Murali Reddy" <murali.re...@citrix.com> wrote: > >>On 11/01/13 2:55 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> >>wrote: >> >>>Thanks for the detailed and enlightening write-up*. >>> >>>I feel that the GSLB service is not a NetworkElement. >>>NetworkElements are those that participate in the L2/L3 orchestration of >>>VMs. >>>GSLB providers do not do this. >> >>Thanks for the review Chiradeep. Sure, GSLB service, is indeed cross-zone >>service, does not fit in to NetWorkElement model. I will by-pass using >>NetWorkElement, and let GSLB orchestration send commands directly to >>agent >>representing the GSLB provider. >> >>> >>>It does not even participate in the existing Loadbalancer workflow. >>> >>>In fact I would assert that this is a completely different higher-level >>>orchestration workflow that should not need to touch network elements or >>>the network manager. >>>You could even write this feature by orchestrating it using the end-user >>>APIs. >> >>Agreed. GSLB orchestration need not be part of network manager, I will >>restrict it to service layer. >> >>I will update the spec and get back. >> >>> >>> >>>*A lot of folks strive to format the document according to the template >>>but the template is just to make sure that vital information is not >>>missed. What ends up happening is that there's a lot of information, but >>>incoherently organized. Nice job. >>> >>> >>>On 1/8/13 12:52 PM, "Murali Reddy" <murali.re...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> >>>>In continuation to my proposal [1], I am brining GSLB support >>>>separately for discussion. I have put up functional specification and >>>>design documentation at [2]. Please provide feedback, comments. >>>> >>>>Quick abstract of the feature: >>>> >>>>Today CloudStack supports load balancing traffic across the VM >>>>instances >>>>with in a zone. In case of multi-zone clouds, users can launch service >>>>across one or more zones for high availability and disaster recovery. >>>>GSLB >>>>is set of technologies that are used to load balance traffic across >>>>multiple location and also provides disaster recovery. With this >>>>feature >>>>CloudStack would be able to orchestrate setting up load balancing >>>>across >>>>multiple zones and also provide disaster recovery solution in case of >>>>multiple zone clouds. >>>> >>>> >>>>[1] http://markmail.org/message/lx6tyikvmvd6wix4 >>>> >>>>[2]https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/GSLB+%28Globa >>>>l >>>>+ >>>>S >>>>e >>>>rver+Load+Balancing%29+Functional+specification+and+Design+Document >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > >
