If that did not work, try to clone the kilo lbaasv2 from the github and do
python setup.py install. and then do all the config changes in
neutron.conf, neutron_lbaas.conf, lbaas_agent.ini. Start the lbaas agent.
Don't forget to install the haproxy.
To know what all config changes to be done, I s
Please review the following heat changes for the LBaaS v2
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/228598/
Thanks
Banashankar
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.op
ce with
>> several APIs.
>> I will post update in this thread later (after meeting).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sergey.
>>
>> On 23 September 2015 at 14:37, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
>>
>>> Seperate ns would work great.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Kevin
>>>
>>> ---
omething like
> > that work? PoolMember wouldn't have to change, the same resource could
> > probably work for whatever lb it was pointing at I'm guessing.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> >
> > __
> > From: Banashankar KV [banvee...@gmail.co
nd would love
> to re-litigate that argument. :-) ).
>
> Thanks,
> doug
>
>
>
> On Sep 22, 2015, at 5:40 PM, Banashankar KV wrote:
>
> Ok, sounds good. So now the question is how should we name the new V2
> resources ?
>
>
> Thanks
> Banashankar
>
&g
ecause backwards
> compatibility means keeping that around. If they're not API resources,
> then if we named appended the resources with V2 right now, will we be
> able to remove the V2 once V1 gets removed?
>
> Thanks,
> Brandon
> On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 16:40 -0700, Banasha
> Thanks,
> Kevin
>
> ----------
> *From:* Banashankar KV [banvee...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4:16 PM
>
> *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] - Heat support for LbaasV2
>
> But
t support for LbaasV2
>
> Well I'd hate to have the V2 postfix on it because V1 will be deprecated
> and removed, which means the V2 being there would be lame. Is there any
> kind of precedent set for for how to handle this?
>
> Thanks,
> Brandon
> On Tue, 2015-09-22 at
Brandon
> On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 14:49 -0700, Banashankar KV wrote:
> > So are we thinking of making it as ?
> > OS::Neutron::LoadBalancerV2
> >
> > OS::Neutron::ListenerV2
> >
> > OS::Neutron::PoolV2
> >
> > OS::Neutron::PoolMemberV2
> >
> &
> > We're using the v1 resources...
>> >
>> > If the v2 ones are compatible and can seamlessly upgrade, great
>> >
>> > Otherwise, make new ones please.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Kevin
>> >
>> > _
ng. One of those things we
> want to have and people ask for but has always gotten a lower priority
> due to the critical things needed.
>
> Thanks,
> Brandon
> On Mon, 2015-09-21 at 17:57 -0700, Banashankar KV wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > I was thinking of starting the work
OS::Neutron::LoadBalancerV2.
> 2. Modify exists resources to support LBaasV2, like adding new property
> 'version' to control which properties should use for each version.
>
> Hope to hear more feedback.
>
> 2015-09-22 8:57 GMT+08:00 Banashankar KV :
>
>> Hi Al
Hi All,
I was thinking of starting the work on heat to support LBaasV2, Is there
any concerns about that?
I don't know if it is the right time to bring this up :D .
Thanks,
Banashankar (bana_k)
__
OpenStack Development Maili
13 matches
Mail list logo
