On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Tomoe Sugihara <to...@midokura.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Murali Reddy <murali.re...@citrix.com> wrote: >> On 08/08/12 1:16 PM, "Tomoe Sugihara" <to...@midokura.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>----------------------------------------------------------- >>>This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: >>>https://reviews.apache.org/r/6464/ >>>----------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>>Review request for cloudstack. >>> >>> >>>Description >>>------- >>> >>>We are working on integrating our SDN technology with CloudStack and >>>found that we need to register these inside the code. >>>We haven't finished implementation, but it'd be great if this'd be >>>accepted in advance in time for 4.0 so we can do integration work against >>>4.0 later. We'd be happy to provide our integration code once it's done. >> >> Fix looks good. But just wondering why would you want just introduce a new >> provider which is not functional? If I may suggest, at least get in the >> skeleton of the implementation of files that is required. I would be happy >> to help with that or you can refer to the Nicira NVP integration to get an >> idea of what needs to be changed. > > Thanks for your help. I really appreciate it. > We just started our work and given the time frame (I believe code > freeze is at the end of this week), > I don't think we can finish our integration. But at least, we'd like > to be integration ready with CS 4.0. > If this change is in, I believe we can take some time to implement our > network element and guru.
Hi Murali, I'll update the diff on CR to include skeletons as you suggested. Thanks, Tomoe > >> >>> >>>Let me know if there's any processes or criteria to follow when it comes >>>to pushing this kind of vendor specific code. >> >> I guess there is no process/criteria to follow to push vendor specific >> code. Just extend the integration points (NetworkElement, Network Guru, >> Provider etc) you will have to in order to support Midokura SDN and keep >> the implementation contained as PluggableService so that there is choice >> to turn on/off the Midokura SDN controller support. >> >>> >>>Also, not an urgent thing, but it'd be handier if we could specify these >>>information in configuration files in the future. >> >> Agree. List of Network service provider should be configubrable through >> component locator. > > That'd be great:) > > Thanks, > Tomoe > >> >>> >>>==================== >>>Add Provider and NetworkDevice for Midokura MidoNet >>> >>>Signed-off-by: Tomoe Sugihara <to...@midokura.com> >>>==================== >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Tomoe >>> >>> >>>Diffs >>>----- >>> >>> api/src/com/cloud/network/Network.java >>>459b05bc6abe61765974804e43fc4dbae819e20f >>> server/src/com/cloud/network/ExternalNetworkDeviceManager.java >>>dec0608c8df8193781c057ae32f71c4a504d41d1 >>> >>>Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/6464/diff/ >>> >>> >>>Testing >>>------- >>> >>>ant clean-all build-all >>> >>> >>>Thanks, >>> >>>Tomoe Sugihara >>> >>> >> >>
