[placement][ptg] Resource Provider Partitioning
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Eric Fried wrote:
> Does this have anything to do with the topic of separate projects owning
> different resource providers in the same tree? Where "owning" indicates
> responsibility for creation, positioning (i.e. where in the tree, who's
> the parent), and inventory management, but *not* allocations.
This is different: Multiple clouds, one placement.
However, what you describe is probably a thing that warrants discussion.
If you agree, stick it on the etherpad with these two paragraphs and
I'll come around to it, eventually, in this process.
> This was in the context of e.g. neutron owning bandwidth RPs, or cyborg
> owning FPGA RPs.
> In Denver (possibly twice) we talked about the various actors actually
> needing to know this. I don't remember exactly why - was it only so that
> each actor knows not to stomp on providers it doesn't own? And is that a
> problem that needs a solution other than each actor just knowing which
> providers it's responsible for and leaving anything else alone?
Chris Dent Ù©â??Ì¯â??Û¶ https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent