1. the distinction between servergroups and services is..... blurry.
So if we wanted to spin up several load balancers we'd have first
create a node definition for each balancer then add the proper
services to the node definitions. This seems to be the reverse of what
is done now with the host being assigned a servergroup which has
services defined for what the "group" does. Am I incorrect in my
understanding? If not, then there will probably be slightly more work
involved to setup multiple hosts doing the "same" thing, no?
It does help make things clearer and much more "granular" but let's
say one host has a minor difference in how the service is configured,
we would have to accomodate the tweak somehow either by cloning a
service definition and making the new definition specific to the host
or by adding in extra modifications using another specification file.
I guess both seem equal to me but the enhanced granularity/readability
of your proposal would probably help with self-documentation and
managability. That is of course if my understanding of the setup is