openstack team mailing list archive

[Justin Santa Barbara <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ah - well, I was sort of expecting that we'd all go the other way and agree
some core functionality, and I thought that volumes should definitely be
part of that.  I'd hope that the core functionality would always be part of
the core API, and I'd include images & volumes in that list.

I think that building an extensible API is an ambitious proposition.  AWS
seems to have some pretty rough edges in their API because they've built
everything incrementally, and I would hope that we could do better, even if
it does mean 'big design up front'.

I think the block storage / volumes, networking, images and compute should
all be part of the core API and should work well together.  We shouldn't be
relying on extensions for Cactus.  In fact, I'd rather leave out extensions
until we have a solid use case.  You may be saying that volumes will be our
test-use case, but I think that will yield a sub-optimal API.



With regards to the difference between the CloudServers API and the
OpenStack API, I really do think there should be separate documents.  I'd
like for the OpenStack API to basically just have the JSON & XML interfaces
in there, and none of the operational stuff that Rackspace needs to do to
operate a public cloud (such as caching)  That is important stuff, but we
need to divide and conquer.  I'd also like to see a third document, by
NASA/Anso, which describes a deployment profile for a private cloud
(probably no caching or rate limits).  I think the division will actually
help us here - I don't think anyone will argue with Rackspace's expertise on
their deployment needs, nor with NASA's on theirs, and we can just have the
core behavior in the OpenStack API spec.

Justin





On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Paul Voccio <paul.voccio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>  Justin -
>
>  Thought some more on your comments wrt images being in the 1.1 api spec.
> I agree with you that it doesn't make sense in the long term to have them in
> the compute api since the service will delegate to glance in the long term.
> I would propose that in the 1.2 or other future spec that /images move to an
> action on /compute since that’s really what is happening. I don't know that
> it makes sense to do so in 1.1 as changes are contentious enough without
> being a total rewrite.
>
>  Looking forward to your feedback,
> pvo
>
>   From: Justin Santa Barbara <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 14:32:52 -0800
> To: <openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] OpenStack Compute API 1.1
>
>  Some thoughts...
>
>  General:
>
>
>    - Are we writing the OpenStack API, or are we writing the document for
>    the next version of Cloud Servers?  In my opinion, the two need to be
>    separate.  For example, specifications of resource limits and rate limits,
>    supported compression encodings, timeout on persistent connections,
>    pagination, caching, polling and resize confirmation windows don't belong in
>    the core OpenStack API.  These should be put in the CloudServers v1.1
>    documentation, but a different OpenStack provider will not impose the same
>    limitations that Rackspace will.
>
>
>  Metadata:
>
>
>    - The 5 item limit will probably need to be raised if we start using
>    the metadata for hints etc, but this is no big deal
>    - What is the behaviour of the metadata collection update when metadata
>    is already present (merge or replace)?  Can this return the new metadata
>    values instead of no-return-value?
>    - Should we allow custom metadata on all items?  Should we replace some
>    properties with well-known metadata?  e.g. on flavors, should the disk
>    property move to openstack:disk metadata?  This way we don't need to define
>    the exact set of metadata on all items for eternity (e.g. authors on
>    extensions)
>    - Are duplicate metadata keys allowed?
>    - Can we please reserve the openstack: prefix, just like AWS reserves
>    the aws: prefix
>
>
>  IP Addresses:
>
>
>    - Instead of just supporting a public and private network, how about
>    specifying <network id="public"> and <network id="private">.  This way we
>    can also support more networks e.g. SAN, private VPN networks, HPC
>    interconnects etc
>    - Is it useful to know which IPV4 addresses and IPV6 addresses map to
>    network cards?  Right now if there are multiple addresses on the same
>    network, the correspondence is undefined.
>    - What happens when a machine has a block of addresses?  Is each
>    address listed individually?  What happens in IPv6 land where a machine
>    could well have a huge block?  I think we need a netmask.
>
>
>  Extensions:
>
>
>    - How are the XML schemas going to work with extension elements?  Right
>    now, it's very free-form, which can cause problems with useful schemas.  Are
>    the proposed schemas available?
>
>
>  Volumes:
>
>
>    - Volume support is core to OpenStack (and has been since launch).
>     This needs therefore to be in the core API, not in an extension.  Or if it
>    is an extension then compute, images and flavors should all be in extensions
>    also (which would be cool, if a little complicated.)
>
>
>
>
>  Justin
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:30 AM, John Purrier <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>  Bumping this to the top of the list. One of the key deliverables for
>> Cactus is a complete and usable OpenStack Compute API. This means that using
>> only the API and tools that interact with the OpenStack Compute API Nova can
>> be installed and configured; once running all of the Nova features and
>> functions for VM, Network, and Volume provisioning and management are
>> accessible and operable through the API.
>>
>>
>>
>> We need your eyes on this, to ensure that the spec is correct. Please take
>> the time to review and comment, the more up-front work we do here the better
>> the implementation will be.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: openstack-bounces+john=openstack.org@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
>> openstack-bounces+john=openstack.org@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>> Gabe Westmaas
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 3:03 PM
>> To: openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [Openstack] OpenStack API 1.1
>>
>>
>>
>> A blueprint and proposed spec for OpenStack API 1.1 has been posted and I
>> would love to get feedback on the specification.
>>
>>
>>
>> Blueprint:
>>
>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/openstack-api-1-1
>>
>>
>>
>> Spec wiki:
>>
>> http://wiki.openstack.org/OpenStackAPI_1-1
>>
>>
>>
>> Detailed Spec:
>>
>>
>> http://wiki.openstack.org/OpenStackAPI_1-1?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=c11-devguide-20110209.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>> We'd like to finish up as much of the API implementation for cactus as
>> possible, and in particular we want to make sure that we get API extensions
>> correct as early as possible.  Other new features in the 1.1 spec include
>> the ability to view both IPv4 and v6 addresses, migration to the OpenStack
>> namespace and moving from image IDs in responses to URIs (imageRef) for the
>> image.  There may be some additional changes as well, please jump in if I
>> missed some.
>>
>>
>>
>> I will add details to the wiki page as needed based on discussions on the
>> mailing list.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks, and let me know if you have questions.
>>
>>
>>
>> Gabe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>>
>> Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>>
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>> Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>  _______________________________________________ Mailing list:
> https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.netUnsubscribe :
> https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help :
> https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>  Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message (including any attached or
> embedded documents) is intended for the exclusive and confidential use of the
> individual or entity to which this message is addressed, and unless otherwise
> expressly indicated, is confidential and privileged information of Rackspace.
> Any dissemination, distribution or copying of the enclosed material is prohibited.
> If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail
> at abuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, and delete the original message.
> Your cooperation is appreciated.
>
>