Re: default network space

2017-10-19 Thread Ian Booth
On 19/10/17 16:33, Ian Booth wrote: > > > On 19/10/17 15:22, John Meinel wrote: >> So at the moment, I don't think Juju supports what you're looking for, >> which is cross model relations without public addresses. We've certainly >> discussed supporting all private for cross model. The main iss

Re: default network space

2017-10-18 Thread Ian Booth
On 19/10/17 15:22, John Meinel wrote: > So at the moment, I don't think Juju supports what you're looking for, > which is cross model relations without public addresses. We've certainly > discussed supporting all private for cross model. The main issue is that we > often drive parts of the firewa

Re: default network space

2017-10-18 Thread John Meinel
So at the moment, I don't think Juju supports what you're looking for, which is cross model relations without public addresses. We've certainly discussed supporting all private for cross model. The main issue is that we often drive parts of the firewalls (security groups) but without understanding

Re: default network space

2017-10-13 Thread James Beedy
I can give a high level of what I feel is a reasonably common use case. I have infrastructure in two primary locations; AWS, and MAAS (at the local datacenter). The nodes at the datacenter have a direct fiber route via virtual private gateway in us-west-2, and the instances in AWS/us-west-2 have a

Re: default network space

2017-10-12 Thread Ian Booth
Copying in the Juju list also On 12/10/17 22:18, Ian Booth wrote: > I'd like to understand the use case you have in mind a little better. The > premise of the network-get output is that charms should not think about public > vs private addresses in terms of what to put into relation data - the oth

Re: default network space

2017-10-12 Thread Ian Booth
I'd like to understand the use case you have in mind a little better. The premise of the network-get output is that charms should not think about public vs private addresses in terms of what to put into relation data - the other remote unit should not be exposed to things in those terms. There's s

default network space

2017-10-11 Thread James Beedy
Hello all, In case you haven't noticed, we now have a network_get() function available in charmhelpers.core.hookenv (in master, not stable). Just wanted to have a little discussion about how we are going to be parsing network_get(). I first want to address the output of network_get() for an inst