Cloud-init is going into Fedora. I know it's only useful for EC2 at the moment, but should we be looking at leveraging it?
--Hugh
On 09/23/2011 04:30 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
Cloud-init is going into Fedora. I know it's only useful for EC2 at the moment, but should we be looking at leveraging it?
--Hugh
aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
This seems close to what we must have to do in bootstrapping audrey. I'd imagine it would be worth taking a look at to see how much overlap there is with out currently solution and how much difficulty there would be in making it able to cope with the virtual-cd method we are using on other providers.
M
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 13:20 -0400, Mike Orazi wrote:
On 09/23/2011 04:30 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
Cloud-init is going into Fedora. I know it's only useful for EC2 at the moment, but should we be looking at leveraging it?
--Hugh
aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
This seems close to what we must have to do in bootstrapping audrey. I'd imagine it would be worth taking a look at to see how much overlap there is with out currently solution and how much difficulty there would be in making it able to cope with the virtual-cd method we are using on other providers.
M _______________________________________________ aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
I took a quick look and it seems what they are doing is similar to what we are now doing in regard to allowing the user to specify tooling, a script, to run at launch time. They seem to allow for more flexibility in the format of the tooling.
The thing that we are doing w/Audrey, which it doesn't seem they are doing, is allowing for the passing of parameter- name/values between launching instances.
Mike ping me if you get some cycles to chat. Perhaps we could pull in Greg and Dan too.
Joe
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 18:16 -0400, Joseph VLcek wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 13:20 -0400, Mike Orazi wrote:
On 09/23/2011 04:30 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
Cloud-init is going into Fedora. I know it's only useful for EC2 at the moment, but should we be looking at leveraging it?
--Hugh
aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
This seems close to what we must have to do in bootstrapping audrey. I'd imagine it would be worth taking a look at to see how much overlap there is with out currently solution and how much difficulty there would be in making it able to cope with the virtual-cd method we are using on other providers.
M _______________________________________________ aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
I took a quick look and it seems what they are doing is similar to what we are now doing in regard to allowing the user to specify tooling, a script, to run at launch time. They seem to allow for more flexibility in the format of the tooling.
The thing that we are doing w/Audrey, which it doesn't seem they are doing, is allowing for the passing of parameter- name/values between launching instances.
Mike ping me if you get some cycles to chat. Perhaps we could pull in Greg and Dan too.
Joe
In thinking this over last night, it doesn't appear to me that Cloud-init provides enough functionality for us to change course from the current, Config Server/Audrey Agent path.
Config Server/Audrey Agent path provides better sharing of parameters across multiple instances and is "not" limited to EC2.
Joe
From: Joseph VLcek jvlcek@redhat.com Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:05:34 -0400
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 18:16 -0400, Joseph VLcek wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 13:20 -0400, Mike Orazi wrote:
On 09/23/2011 04:30 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
Cloud-init is going into Fedora. I know it's only useful for EC2 at the moment, but should we be looking at leveraging it?
--Hugh
aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
This seems close to what we must have to do in bootstrapping audrey. I'd imagine it would be worth taking a look at to see how much overlap there is with out currently solution and how much difficulty there would be in making it able to cope with the virtual-cd method we are using on other providers.
M _______________________________________________ aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
I took a quick look and it seems what they are doing is similar to what we are now doing in regard to allowing the user to specify tooling, a script, to run at launch time. They seem to allow for more flexibility in the format of the tooling.
The thing that we are doing w/Audrey, which it doesn't seem they are doing, is allowing for the passing of parameter- name/values between launching instances.
Mike ping me if you get some cycles to chat. Perhaps we could pull in Greg and Dan too.
Joe
In thinking this over last night, it doesn't appear to me that Cloud-init provides enough functionality for us to change course from the current, Config Server/Audrey Agent path.
Config Server/Audrey Agent path provides better sharing of parameters across multiple instances and is "not" limited to EC2.
To elaborate somewhat on Joe's point: The cloud-init stuff appears to be Yet Another Vendor Attempting To Solve Part Of The Bootstrapping Problem (tm), and as such, is interesting as part of the global road-map for cloud stuff. It will be even more interesting if they take the next steps and start dealing for real with the more complex multi-tier app stuff, backend-agnosticism, etc.
In the meantime, we have a plan for 1.0, and I propose to stick to it. This is not a good time to be tossing more features into the mix.
If it turns out that post 1.0, there's a bunch of interest in the community for cloud-init specifically, I don't see a reason why we couldn't converge and/or integrate it.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:05:34AM -0400, Joseph VLcek wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 18:16 -0400, Joseph VLcek wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 13:20 -0400, Mike Orazi wrote:
On 09/23/2011 04:30 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
Cloud-init is going into Fedora. I know it's only useful for EC2 at the moment, but should we be looking at leveraging it?
--Hugh
aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
This seems close to what we must have to do in bootstrapping audrey. I'd imagine it would be worth taking a look at to see how much overlap there is with out currently solution and how much difficulty there would be in making it able to cope with the virtual-cd method we are using on other providers.
M _______________________________________________ aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
I took a quick look and it seems what they are doing is similar to what we are now doing in regard to allowing the user to specify tooling, a script, to run at launch time. They seem to allow for more flexibility in the format of the tooling.
The thing that we are doing w/Audrey, which it doesn't seem they are doing, is allowing for the passing of parameter- name/values between launching instances.
Mike ping me if you get some cycles to chat. Perhaps we could pull in Greg and Dan too.
Joe
In thinking this over last night, it doesn't appear to me that Cloud-init provides enough functionality for us to change course from the current, Config Server/Audrey Agent path.
Config Server/Audrey Agent path provides better sharing of parameters across multiple instances and is "not" limited to EC2.
JRD's point that we shouldn't be worrying about this right this minute because there's no scope for it in 1.0 is 100% correct, and I didn't mean to spawn such a thing -- I just wanted to make sure cloud-init was kept gently floating on the edge of relevant folks' radar.
Having said that, when we *do* have time to look at it further, given the level of use cloud-init gets from Amazon, we ought to make sure we have a good reason not to leverage it in some way.
--H
On 09/27/2011 12:14 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:05:34AM -0400, Joseph VLcek wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 18:16 -0400, Joseph VLcek wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 13:20 -0400, Mike Orazi wrote:
On 09/23/2011 04:30 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
Cloud-init is going into Fedora. I know it's only useful for EC2 at the moment, but should we be looking at leveraging it?
--Hugh
aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
This seems close to what we must have to do in bootstrapping audrey. I'd imagine it would be worth taking a look at to see how much overlap there is with out currently solution and how much difficulty there would be in making it able to cope with the virtual-cd method we are using on other providers.
M _______________________________________________ aeolus-devel mailing list aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
I took a quick look and it seems what they are doing is similar to what we are now doing in regard to allowing the user to specify tooling, a script, to run at launch time. They seem to allow for more flexibility in the format of the tooling.
The thing that we are doing w/Audrey, which it doesn't seem they are doing, is allowing for the passing of parameter- name/values between launching instances.
Mike ping me if you get some cycles to chat. Perhaps we could pull in Greg and Dan too.
Joe
In thinking this over last night, it doesn't appear to me that Cloud-init provides enough functionality for us to change course from the current, Config Server/Audrey Agent path.
Config Server/Audrey Agent path provides better sharing of parameters across multiple instances and is "not" limited to EC2.
JRD's point that we shouldn't be worrying about this right this minute because there's no scope for it in 1.0 is 100% correct, and I didn't mean to spawn such a thing -- I just wanted to make sure cloud-init was kept gently floating on the edge of relevant folks' radar.
Having said that, when we *do* have time to look at it further, given the level of use cloud-init gets from Amazon, we ought to make sure we have a good reason not to leverage it in some way.
--H
+1 to all of the above. Didn't mean to veer 1.0 things either.
aeolus-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
-
Hugh O. Brock -
Joseph VLcek -
jrd＠redhat.com -
Mike Orazi