Re: [Xen-API] Xen Management API draft

[Anthony Liguori <aliguori@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I also reviewed the API document this afternoon.  I'll say that I'm a 
bit less emphatic about this one (although I still appreciate the effort).
My basic problem is that this API is huge.  I understand why most of 
this stuff is included but at the same time, it greatly conflicts with 
existing systems that already do this (for instance, IBM Director's CIM 
interfaces).
What I'd like to see is a minimalistic API that only dealt with Xen 
specific stuff.  If you wished to have an accompanying API that also 
provided other system info (via the same model) that would seem like a 
rather good compromise.
We're interested in a minimalistic Xen stack.  So being able to omit the 
portions of this API that we don't need would be very useful.
Thoughts?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Ewan Mellor wrote:
> Attached is a draft Xen Management API.  This document presents our ideas in
> terms of a data model, with an implied binding to XML-RPC calls.  There are a
> few examples in there too -- hopefully it's clear how the mapping between the
> document and the wire protocol.
>
> Hopefully, we can standardise the data model and wire protocol (one implying
> the other) and then the Xen project would guarantee that that wire protocol
> would be supported for the long term.  Behind that interface, we would then be
> free to improve Xend, and giving a solid foundation for Xen-CIM, and third
> party GUIs and tools and so on.  The API becomes effectively part of the
> "guarantees" for Xen.
>
> I expect that we will be asked for client-side bindings for a number of
> languages.  It is my intention that a binding to any particular language would
> be a very thin translation from the host language's values and types onto the
> fixed XML-RPC, and then we shouldn't have too much trouble maintaining
> bindings in Python or Perl or C++ or whatever people want.
>
> This document is totally open to discussion and modification, so please, let's
> get started!
>
> In particular, we need to get this API into a state so that it is the right
> API for Xen-CIM.  We need to think whether libvirt is ready to rely upon this
> API too.  That would mean moving the hypercalls and Xenstore reads and writes
> out of libvirt, and pushing it up the stack alongside the other client-side
> bindings.
>
> Like the OVA spec, this document is for narrow circulation, and once we are
> getting happy with it, we'll circulate it more widely.  I'd like to be able to
> circulate this before OLS, as that will be a good chance to discuss it with
> people face-to-face once they've had a chance to read it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ewan.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> xen-api mailing list
> xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
_______________________________________________
xen-api mailing list
xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api