Eugene,
At the Hong Kong Summit, a new LBaaS feature allowing multiple HAProxy
instances to be utilized in a horizontal scaling manner was discussed allowing
deployment of many HAProxy resources. Does there exist any documentation on how
to deploy multiple HAProxy's? Does it matter how these a
Looks good Eugene!
What about 'status' on the loadbalancer instance? This might be the aggregate
of all the VIP statuses. (worst of VIP[0-N] )
Peter.
From: Eugene Nikanorov [mailto:enikano...@mirantis.com]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 5:15 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject:
Hi Eugene!
Option #2 sounds good.
A few Qs:
I assume we would not need to roll the API version?
Have there been any detailed proposals on the 'loadbalancer' CRUD operations?
In particular, the ability to attach multiple VIPs as was discussed in Hong
Kong.
In general, I think the loadbalancer
Paul,
There are a few ways of doing this but I have used curl then pipe the results
through a python JSON pretty print tool. This formats the JSON for easily
dropping into API docs.
curl ( some Openstack request with JSON output )| python -mjson.tool
Hope this helps,
Peter.
From: Paul Mi
: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Neutron Network Statistics
Hi Mellquist
I'm also interested in the feature.
Could you write some blueprint for proposal?
(May be havana is overloaded, so it will go to icehouse)
Best
Nachi
2013/7/22 Mellquist, Peter :
> Hi!
>
>
>
> I am interested to
Hi!
I am interested to know if the topic of surfacing networking statistics through
the Neutron APIs has been discussed and if there are any existing blueprints
working on this feature? Specifically, the current APIs,
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/APIv2-specification, do not support
What happened to 35357?
In general, new port #s should be applied through IANA and when approved then
made public.
Peter.
-Original Message-
From: openstack-bounces+peter.mellquist=hp@lists.launchpad.net
[mailto:openstack-bounces+peter.mellquist=hp@lists.launchpad.net] On Behal
Excellent topic Joe, thanks for bringing this up.
There are two main perspectives on WADLs: WADLs from a service developer point
of view and WADLs from a cloud developer point of view. I consider the later
the most important since we need to ensure that developers who write all the
killer Opens
This is an Internet-Draft hence it can still be changed or removed. Additional
status codes are a good thing but .. if the proposal is to implement a draft
like this within services, middleware and clients before it is a full standards
track RFC this can might cause issues if changes occur. BTW,
I understand the benefits of being able to generate docs and specs from code
since it ensures that these are in synch and that the specs follow what the
code supports but ... in regard to API design this approach leaves something to
be desired. There is much value in designing the APIs up front
The latest github source and tars no longer have any WADL or XSDs? ( looks like
the symlinks now point to non-existent directories ).
https://github.com/rackspace/keystone/tree/master/keystone
I am interested in looking at the latest identity.wadl and XSDs.
Thanks,
Peter.
__
Looking through the latest Keystone code and developer guide I have noticed
some differences in the usage of PUT and POST CRUD operations.
Resource Creation admin.py Developer Guide Says
Tenant PUT
12 matches
Mail list logo
