IN IRC the topic came up about supporting many-to-many load balancers to amphorae. I believe a consensus was made that allowing only one-to-many load balancers to amphorae would be the first step forward, and re-evaluate later, since colocation and apolocation will need to work (which brings up another topic, defining what it actually means to be colocated: On the same amphorae, on the same amphorae host, on the same cell/cluster, on the same data center/availability zone. That should be something we discuss later, but not right now).
I am fine with that decisions, but Doug brought up a good point that this could very well just be a decision for the controller driver and Octavia shouldn't mandate this for all drivers. So I think we need to clearly define what decisions are the responsibility of the controller driver versus what decisions are mandated by Octavia's construct. Items I can come up with off the top of my head: 1) LB:Amphora - M:N vs 1:N 2) VIPs:LB - M:N vs 1:N 3) Pool:HMs - 1:N vs 1:1 I'm sure there are others. I'm sure each one will need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. We will be walking a fine line between flexibility and complexity. We just need to define how far over that line and in which direction we are willing to go. Thanks, Brandon _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
