On Jul 11, 2011, at 6:19 PM, Ewan Mellor wrote:
> Up to now, I have assumed that zones would be used as the construct that
> isolated different service offerings, e.g. VMware vs XenServer or 10G
> networking versus 1G, or whatever. Zones therefore play two roles: they give
> you the architecture for large-scale deployments, and they also allow for
> distinguished service offerings.
>
> Are you thinking along these lines?
Not necessarily. Zones don't have *any* intrinsic meaning, other than a
self-contained, shared-nothing deployment of nova. They can be used as you
described, or for geographical distribution, or for any other situation that
makes sense for the deployment needs. As I work for Rackspace, I'm usually
concerned with our needs for deploying nova across and within our data centers,
but I always tried to make sure that meeting Rackspace's needs didn't preclude
any other potential use of OpenStack.
> If so, then I would say that your proposed limitation above is not
> acceptable. We don't want a situation where tenants have to stop using the
> EC2 API as soon as their service provider wants to offer a rich set of
> offerings.
That was my working premise, too, but the decision was made within
Rackspace to not spend time on EC2 support for zones since we use the OS API
exclusively, so my hands were tied.
-- Ed Leafe
This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error,
please delete it.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
