It should work as long as the connectivity is there. You can ensure that the docs specify that this connectivity exists and works, since it is beyond the control of CloudStack.
On 7/11/12 10:50 AM, "Ram Ganesh" <ram.gan...@citrix.com> wrote: >Chiradeep, > >For autoscale in the current model the monitoring + trigger happens from >the load balancer device. It then issues CS API calls to deploy/destroy >vms. How can we make it work? > >Thanks, >Ram > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com] >> Sent: 11 July 2012 23:14 >> To: CloudStack DeveloperList >> Subject: Re: Network element's access to CS mgmt server....? >> >> Certainly user VMs cannot. But system vms can access the management >> server, typically on port 8250. >> One option might be to poll the VPX (depending on how many there are) >> for >> autoscaling triggers from the MS. >> >> >> On 7/11/12 6:18 AM, "Ram Ganesh" <ram.gan...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >> >Alex, >> > >> >> You need to start the vpx with a nic in the management network. In >> >> CloudStack code, SSVM (Secondary Storage Virtual Machine) and CPVM >> >> (Console Proxy Virtual Machine) both have examples of this. They >> both >> >> have agents that connect back to CS Management server over the >> >> management network. >> > >> >Yes we can add a nic(vif) to a vpx in the management network and >> ensure >> >reach ability to the CS mgmt server. But how about the CS mgmt ports >> such >> >as 8080/443 - they may be blocked by intermediate firewall/VR? Also >> >please note unlike SSVM from vpx we may be able to issue a finite ( >> >restricted) set of CS API calls so we may not be able to issue >> firewall >> >rule related API calls. Also the load balancer devices can be placed >> into >> >network from outside the context of CloudStack and later the device >> can >> >be added into CloudStack using addNetscalerLoadbalancer()API. >> > >> >So to put it another way - Can the VMs spread across various guest >> >networks reach out to the CS mgmt server using a same IP ? >> > >> > >> >Thanks, >> >Ram >> > >
