> > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >>> One advantage of the service plugin is that one can leverage the >>> neutron common framework such as Keystone authentication where common >>> scoping is done. It would be important in the policy type of framework to >>> have such scoping >>> >> >> The framework you're referring to is common and already reusable, it's >> not a prerogative of Neutron. >> > > Are you suggesting that Service Plugins, L3, IPAM etc become individual > endpoints, resulting in redundant authentication round-trips for each of > the components. > > Wouldn't this result in degraded performance and potential consistency > issues? >
The endpoint - in the OpenStack lingo - that exposes the API abstractions (concepts and operations) can be, logically and physically, different from the worker that implements these abstractions; authentication is orthogonal to this and I am not suggesting what you mention.
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
