On 05/09/2012 03:50 PM, Maru Newby wrote: > Hi Gary, > > +1 for adding a framework for plugin to agent communication via rpc. > > Regarding your list of shortcomings, the security of the database connection > would be easily remedied, but the other arguments are compelling by > themselves. > > I'm less clear on the need to implement rpc communication between the vif > driver and quantum plugin, at least as part of this blueprint. Am I missing > a use-case that is not already handled by Quantum's rest interface?
At least one of the reasons for this is so that connection of a newly created tap device to the virtual network by the agent would be triggered immediately by the RPC, rather than waiting for agent's periodic poll of the node's local tap devices to discover it. -Bob > > Thanks, > > > Maru > > > On 2012-05-09, at 4:26 AM, Gary Kotton wrote: > >> Hi, >> I have added a very high level description on how to address the issue. This >> can be seen at: >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MbcBA2Os4b98ybdgAw2qe_68R1NG6KMh8zdZKgOlpvg/edit >> Comments will be greatly appreciated. >> Questions: >> 1. Do we want agents to be backward compatible (that is, still maintain the >> polling code) >> 2. The generation of the Agent ID >> 3. Any other ideas or thoughts about the matter? >> I'd like to go ahead with a POC and implement this. >> Thanks >> Gary >> >> -- >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~netstack >> Post to : netstack@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~netstack >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~netstack Post to : netstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~netstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
