On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
> That facility exists already, although the only supported baremetal > appliance is the Juniper SRX. And thats expensive......... Id prefer a viable open source solution external on bare metal then on the hypervisors > On 3/25/13 1:59 PM, "Outback Dingo" <outbackdi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >it would be even nicer if the "virtual router" could be bare metal so as > >not to use resources required on the hosts > >Id much prefer to run Vyatta, or other FreeBSD pf box as the virtual > >router, and just have cloudstack comunicate to it > >however its probably outside the scope of this document, Im also not sure > >if its feasible to have an external "virtual router" > >though i know there Nicera, and other network based plugins, someone > >should > >create a VR for baremetal based on the > >CS image... isnt it FreeBSD anyway ?? > > > > > >On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Chip Childers > ><chip.child...@sungard.com>wrote: > > > >> On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:54:09PM -0700, Chiradeep Vittal wrote: > >> > To enable a cloud to start quicker, I am proposing that system vms be > >> made optional in the boot-up of a CloudStack Cloud. > >> > I'm working on the 'quickcloud' branch and the detailed proposal is > >>here: > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/clnVAQ > >> > > >> > >> +1 to this proposal. Just to confirm one thing though... when you say > >> "run alternately on baremetal", I assume you actually mean that the > >> services in question would run within an OS (baremetal or virtual) > >> outside the control domain of the CS management server. Correct? > >> > >
