[Capi-bof] Charter - last call for changes

[Sam Johnston]

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Ignacio Martin Llorente <
llorente at dacya.ucm.es> wrote:

> Agree that is fully out of scope, the API should be "service-
> agnostic", managing the VMs as black boxes.
>
> However, manipulation of images is required before creating the VMs
> and the creation of private virtual networks (subnet not connected to
> the Internet) is an interesting feature to deploy services consisting
> in several VMs. In any case, for a first specification, I would
> suggest that we do not consider such functionality, assuming that the
> VM image has been pre-registered and the creation of the VM returns a
> public IP.
>
> Thanks for your comments
>

You're still focusing on VMs - I'd be interested to hear your explanation as
to how catering for everyone's needs (as proposed by a number of us) will be
any more complex than restricting the spec to your own requirements.

Aside from that the "network tag" suggestion I made before would allow for
the creation of private networks (two interfaces with the same tag would
obviously be wired together) but assigning meaning to those tags (subnet
details, etc.) would be left to the fabric. The vast majority of workloads
don't care, so long as they can talk to each other and their clients
(assuming they have any which is not always the case).

Sam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/capi-bof/attachments/20090325/2a59b196/attachment.html