So to catch myself up, this will allow functional security group isolation/ACLs on both 'shared' and 'isolated' networks?
-kd >-----Original Message----- >From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com] >Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 1:36 PM >To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Security Groups Isolation in Advanced Zone > >Folks please pass on comments if any, otherwise it is assumed that the spec is >approved by the community > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Anthony Xu [mailto:xuefei...@citrix.com] >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 3:53 PM >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Security Groups Isolation in Advanced Zone >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Isolation+based >> +on+ >> Security+Groups+in+Advance+zone >> >> >> This is upgraded spec , >> Compared to original one, following are major changes >> >> 1. SG enabled is zone wide parameter, if this zone is SG enabled, all >> guest networks in this zone must be SG enabled. >> 2. support all shared network types, includes zone-wide shared >> network, domain-wide shared networks and account-specific share >> networks 3. support multiple SG enabled networks in one SG enabled zone. >> 4. VM can be on multiple SG enabled networks 5. SG rules apply to >> all NICs for a VM 6. support both KVM and XenServer. >> >> Comments, question, suggestion and flame are welcome! >> >> >> Thanks, >> Anthony >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Dave Cahill [mailto:dcah...@midokura.jp] >> > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:29 PM >> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Security Groups Isolation in Advanced Zone >> > >> > Hi Anthony, >> > >> > Understood - thanks for the update. >> > >> > Dave. >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Anthony Xu <xuefei...@citrix.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Dave, >> > > >> > > For 4.1 , this feature is only for shared network on advanced >> > > zone, >> > both >> > > XenServer and KVM are supported. >> > > Will upgrade FS soon. >> > > >> > > >> > > Anthony >> > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Dave Cahill [mailto:dcah...@midokura.jp] >> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 12:33 AM >> > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Security Groups Isolation in Advanced >> > > > Zone >> > > > >> > > > Hi Manan, >> > > > >> > > > I'm interested in this feature - when (roughly) are you planning >> > > > to commit this to master? >> > > > >> > > > Are you planning the full list of features from your >> > > > requirements >> > doc >> > > > (including support for Adavnced, Isolated networks) in 4.1? >> > > > >> > > > Thanks in advance, >> > > > Dave. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Manan Shah >> > > > <manan.s...@citrix.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Yes, FS definitely needs updating. Please also look at the >> > "Future" >> > > > > section of Alena's FS. >> > > > > >> > > > > Regards, >> > > > > Manan Shah >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On 1/4/13 1:57 PM, "Prasanna Santhanam" >> > > > <prasanna.santha...@citrix.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > >On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 12:16:44AM +0530, Manan Shah wrote: >> > > > > >> Hi Chip, >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> As Alena had mentioned in her FS, her focus was to >> > > > > >> initially >> > > > support >> > > > > >>only >> > > > > >> the functionality that was enabled in CS 2.2. She had >> > > > > >>created >> > a >> > > > section >> > > > > >>in >> > > > > >> her FS that talked about Future release plans. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> My requirements page covers requirements for both, the CS >> > > > > >> 2.2 >> > use >> > > > case >> > > > > >>as >> > > > > >> well as the broader use case. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Let me know if you have additional questions. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >Thanks - Alena's FS lists only support for KVM while you have >> > listed >> > > > > >support for XenServer and KVM. Guess the FS needs updating? >> > > > > > >> > > > > >-- >> > > > > >Prasanna., >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > Dave. >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks, >> > Dave.
