Hi Jay,
Just so you have some information on the API before the meeting here is
the spec for it:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/122338/
I'm sure there is a lot of details that might be missing but it should
give you a decent idea. Sorry for the markup/markdown being dumb if you
try to build wi
Yup, can do! :)
-jay
On 10/27/2014 01:55 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote:
Hi Jay,
Let’s add that as an agenda item at our Weekly IRC meeting. Can you make
this timeslot?
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Octavia#Meetings
Thanks,
Doug
On 10/27/14, 11:27 AM, "Jay Pipes" wrote:
Sorry for top-postin
Hi Jay,
Let’s add that as an agenda item at our Weekly IRC meeting. Can you make
this timeslot?
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Octavia#Meetings
Thanks,
Doug
On 10/27/14, 11:27 AM, "Jay Pipes" wrote:
>Sorry for top-posting, but where can the API working group see the
>proposed Octavia API
Sorry for top-posting, but where can the API working group see the
proposed Octavia API specification or documentation? I'd love it if the
API WG could be involved in reviewing the public REST API.
Best,
-jay
On 10/27/2014 10:01 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Doug Wi
Got it. So we will be discussing this in the 2PM meeting today. Correct?
Regards,
Mandeep
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Mandeep Dhami
> wrote:
> > Hi Kyle:
> >
> > Are you scheduling an on-demand meeting, or are you proposing that the
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Mandeep Dhami wrote:
> Hi Kyle:
>
> Are you scheduling an on-demand meeting, or are you proposing that the
> agenda for next neutron meeting include this as an on-demand item?
>
Per my email to the list recently [1], the weekly rotating Neutron
meeting is now an o
Hi Kyle:
Are you scheduling an on-demand meeting, or are you proposing that the
agenda for next neutron meeting include this as an on-demand item?
Regards,
Mandeep
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Sumit Naiksatam
> wrote:
> > Several pe
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote:
> Hi Brandon,
>
>> 4. I brought this up now so that we can decide whether we want to
>> discuss it at the advanced services spin out session. I don't see the
>> harm in opinions being discussed before the summit, during the summit,
>> and more
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Sumit Naiksatam
wrote:
> Several people have been requesting that we resume the Advanced
> Services' meetings [1] to discuss some of the topics being mentioned
> in this thread. Perhaps it might help people to have a focussed
> discussion on the topic of "advanced
Several people have been requesting that we resume the Advanced
Services' meetings [1] to discuss some of the topics being mentioned
in this thread. Perhaps it might help people to have a focussed
discussion on the topic of "advanced services' spin-out" prior to the
design summit session [2] in Par
Hi Doug:
On 10/26/14, 6:01 PM, "Doug Wiegley" wrote:
>Hi Brandon,
>
>> 4. I brought this up now so that we can decide whether we want to
>> discuss it at the advanced services spin out session. I don't see the
>> harm in opinions being discussed before the summit, during the summit,
>> and more
Hi Brandon,
> 4. I brought this up now so that we can decide whether we want to
> discuss it at the advanced services spin out session. I don't see the
> harm in opinions being discussed before the summit, during the summit,
> and more thoroughly after the summit.
I agree with this sentiment. I
Good questions Doug. My answers are as follows:
1. Yes
2. Some time after Kilo (same as I don't know when)
3. The main reason a spin out makes sense from Neutron is that the scope
for Neutron is too large for the attention advances services needs from
the Neutron Core. If all of advanced service
Hi all,
Before we get into the details of which API goes where, I’d like to see us
answer the questions of:
1. Are we spinning out?
2. When?
3. With or without the rest of advanced services?
4. Do we want to wait until we (the royal “we” of “the Neutron team”) have
had the Paris summit discussion
+1 to this, eh!
Though it sounds more like you're talking about spinning the Octavia user
API out of Octavia to become it's own thing (ie. "Openstack LBaaS"), and
then ensuring a standardized driver interface that vendors (including
Octavia) will interface with. It's sort of a half-dozen of one, s
With the recent talk about advanced services spinning out of Neutron,
and the fact most of the LBaaS community has wanted LBaaS to spin out of
Neutron, I wanted to bring up a possibility and gauge interest and
opinion on this possibility.
Octavia is going to (and has) an API. The current thinking
16 matches
Mail list logo
