RE: [camp] RE: Cloud Foundry Core

["Behrens, Michael V CTR (US)" <michael.v.behrens.ctr@mail.mil>]

Discovery has a lot of meaning - I'd suggest Query instead. 
If we do not have one, then I'd recommend an issue to capture that.

-----Original Message-----
From: camp@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:camp@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Ashok Malhotra
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 11:03 AM
To: camp@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [camp] RE: Cloud Foundry Core

Do we have an issue that covers service discovery or should we open one?
All the best, Ashok

On 11/14/2012 7:47 AM, Behrens, Michael V CTR (US) wrote:
> Good info...Having a query REST API to get a list of services from a provider sounds like a basic/important interface.  If new services are installed, they should be able to make themselves visible, however that might be an internal mechanism (outside the spec).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: camp@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:camp@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Otto
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 10:22 AM
> To: camp@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [camp] Cloud Foundry Core
>
> Today there was an announcement in the news you should be aware of. The Cloud Foundry guys have made an attempt at cross-installation compatibility by defining supported application frameworks and services that applications can use. There is a test tool. If the list of standard ones is present, then you are considered compatible, and an application expecting those components is expected to work when moved to that platform.
>
> http://core.cloudfoundry.org/definition
>
>
> It seems simple, but it does validate the idea of keeping some registry or list of common common components, and a well defined way to check if a given application is expected to work on a target platform.
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: camp-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: camp-help@lists.oasis-open.org