Brandon, It's allowed right now just per API. It's up to a backend to decide the status of a node in case some monitors find it dead.
Thanks, Eugene. On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 4:41 AM, Brandon Logan <brandon.lo...@rackspace.com>wrote: > I have concerns about multiple health monitors on the same pool. Is > this always going to be the same type of health monitor? There’s also > ambiguity in the case where one health monitor fails and another doesn’t. > Is it an AND or OR that determines whether the member is down or not? > > Thanks, > Brandon Logan > > From: Eugene Nikanorov <enikano...@mirantis.com> > Reply-To: "openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Date: Thursday, May 15, 2014 at 9:55 AM > To: "openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Updated Object Model? > > Vijay, > > Pools-monitors are still many to many, if it's not so on the picture - > we'll fix that. > I brought this up as an example of how we dealt with m:n via API. > > Thanks, > Eugene. > > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Vijay Venkatachalam < > vijay.venkatacha...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for the clarification. Eugene. >> >> >> >> A tangential point since you brought healthmon and pool. >> >> >> >> There will be an additional entity called ‘PoolMonitorAssociation’ which >> results in a many to many relationship between pool and monitors. Right? >> >> >> >> Now, the model is indicating a pool can have only one monitor. So a minor >> correction is required to indicate the many to many relationship via >> PoolMonitorAssociation. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Vijay V. >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Eugene Nikanorov [mailto:enikano...@mirantis.com] >> *Sent:* Thursday, May 15, 2014 7:36 PM >> >> *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Updated Object Model? >> >> >> >> Hi Vijay, >> >> >> >> >> When you say API is not available, it means this should not be considered >> like a resource/entity. Correct? >> >> >> >> But then, there would be API like a bind API, that accepts >> loadbalancer_id & listener_id, which creates this object. >> >> And also, there would be an API that will be used to list the listeners >> of a LoadBalancer. >> >> >> >> Right? >> >> Right, that's the same as health monitors and pools work right now: >> there are separate REST action to associate healthmon to a pool >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Eugene. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev