yahoo-eng-team team mailing list archive

[Li Ma <skywalker.nick@xxxxxxxxx>]

Public bug reported:

The user story is: Users can see human-readable security group
descriptions in Horizon because the security group model contains a
description field, but no such field exists for security group rules.
This makes it very confusing for users who have to manage complex
security groups.

I agree that one could encode descriptions as tags, but the problem I
see is that API consumers(Horizon, Users) would have to agree on some
common encoding.  For example... To expose a security group rule
description in Horizon, horizon would have to apply and read tags like
'description:SSH Access for Mallory'.

With a tags-based implementation, if a user wants the description for a
security group rule via the API, they have to get the security group,
then filter the tags according to whatever format horizon chose to
encode the description as.

This is in contrast to getting the description of a security group: Get
the security group and access the description attribute.

I think that resource tags are great, but this seems like a
non-intuitive workaround for a specific data model problem: Security
Groups have descriptions, but Security Group Rules do not.

A discussion is under way in the mailing list:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-September/074046.html

** Affects: neutron
     Importance: Undecided
     Assignee: Li Ma (nick-ma-z)
         Status: New


** Tags: rfe

** Changed in: neutron
     Assignee: (unassigned) => Li Ma (nick-ma-z)

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Yahoo!
Engineering Team, which is subscribed to neutron.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1496705

Title:
  RFE: a common description field for Neutron resources

Status in neutron:
  New

Bug description:
  The user story is: Users can see human-readable security group
  descriptions in Horizon because the security group model contains a
  description field, but no such field exists for security group rules.
  This makes it very confusing for users who have to manage complex
  security groups.

  I agree that one could encode descriptions as tags, but the problem I
  see is that API consumers(Horizon, Users) would have to agree on some
  common encoding.  For example... To expose a security group rule
  description in Horizon, horizon would have to apply and read tags like
  'description:SSH Access for Mallory'.

  With a tags-based implementation, if a user wants the description for a
  security group rule via the API, they have to get the security group,
  then filter the tags according to whatever format horizon chose to
  encode the description as.

  This is in contrast to getting the description of a security group: Get
  the security group and access the description attribute.

  I think that resource tags are great, but this seems like a
  non-intuitive workaround for a specific data model problem: Security
  Groups have descriptions, but Security Group Rules do not.

  A discussion is under way in the mailing list:
  http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-September/074046.html

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1496705/+subscriptions