I pushed a few small changes to the branch bugfix/CID-1230587-2ndtime. It’s not working yet, but should better describe what i mean by using the agent framework.
Do you have a scripts to setup a bare metal zone with advanced networking? If i try it with current master via the UI it hangs on “Creating Cluster”. I would like to set it up so i can test my ideas. Cheers, Hugo On 2 okt. 2014, at 10:58, Hugo Trippaers <h...@trippaers.nl> wrote: > You can see that the Vmware resource provides the VirtualRouterDeployer > interface. So all communication with the VR is triggered by the > VirtualRoutingResource based on commands send using the agent framework. The > vmware resource then only deals with execution and file copy as directed by > the interface. This way the communication between the VR and cloudstack can > be determined per type of hypervisor. > > Looking at you code it is fairly easy to replace what you currently do with > agent based communication. If the virtual routingresource knows about the > PrepareKickstartPxeServerCommand command and triggers the correct scripts > with the right parameters we are pretty much done. I’m already writing a > small prototype to see if my thinking on this is correct. > > One thing i’m wondering about is how do the scripts get on the VR? I think > they are currently not included in the regular systemvm build right? Should > we add the scripts prepare_pxe.sh and baremetal_snat.sh to the regular > systemvm and maybe add all the bits for bare metal? > > As discussed a CC to the dev list so more people can think with us on this. > > > Cheers, > > Hugo > > > On 2 okt. 2014, at 02:04, Frank Zhang <frank.zh...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> Yes please. >> I totally don't know we have changed to agent in vmware VR. I need to >> confirm with some vmware/VR guys. >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Trippie [mailto:trip...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Hugo Trippaers >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 1:11 AM >>> To: Frank Zhang >>> Subject: Re: commit 44a4158c4854d85e4c234655e375fe0c631507d5 >>> >>> Vmware also mainly uses the agent system for communicating with the virtual >>> routers as far as i can see. >>> >>> There are only a few instances i could find that have resources directly >>> talking >>> to the VR instead of going through the proper interfaces. >>> >>> But you are right we should bring this to the community, are you ok if i >>> forward >>> this thread to the dev list? >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Hugo >>> >>> >>> >>> On 30 sep. 2014, at 19:23, Frank Zhang <frank.zh...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I think we should open a discussion in community. >>>> I am not aware anything for redundant VPC router. But if what you say >>> happens, it certainly breaks vmware VR communication. >>>> Though I am not vmware guy, I am sure vmware is designed to use this way >>> to communicate to VR. >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Trippie [mailto:trip...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Hugo Trippaers >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 6:43 AM >>>>> To: Frank Zhang >>>>> Subject: Re: commit 44a4158c4854d85e4c234655e375fe0c631507d5 >>>>> >>>>> Frank, >>>>> >>>>> Amy more thoughts on this? This way of directly accessing the virtual >>>>> router will probably break anyway when the refactoring for the >>>>> redundant VPC router is done, so it would be nice to have it fixed before >>>>> that. >>>>> >>>>> I don't mind helping out with moving the commands to the ConfigHelper >>>>> if you need a hand? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Hugo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 27 sep. 2014, at 14:04, Hugo Trippaers <trip...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hey Frank, >>>>>> >>>>>> The keyfile should be on the class path. The entire script directory >>>>>> is on there >>>>> afaik. >>>>>> >>>>>> Besides that isn't it possible to program the VR using the regular >>>>>> agent >>>>> methods? If we don't we might break stuff in the future when rewrites >>>>> happen to the VR. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>> Hugo >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 27 sep. 2014, at 01:03, Frank Zhang <frank.zh...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hmm, I follow the same code in vmware, it's not baremetal invention. >>>>>>> Do we have these keys on classpath? >>>>>>> Baremetal need to login vmware virtual router to program some PXE >>>>>>> stuff, that's why we need the key file >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Trippie [mailto:trip...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Hugo >>>>>>>> Trippaers >>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2014 2:00 AM >>>>>>>> To: Frank Zhang >>>>>>>> Subject: commit 44a4158c4854d85e4c234655e375fe0c631507d5 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hey Frank, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The following commit includes a fixed path name >>>>>>>> "/usr/share/cloudstack- common/scripts/vm/systemvm/id_rsa.cloud". >>>>>>>> Can you rewrite this to not use a fixed path? Fixed paths will >>>>>>>> eventually lead to bugs as we can't guarantee people using >>>>>>>> CloudStack will use our packaging formats and our locations. Also >>>>>>>> if the class loader can't find the file, it's not there and >>>>>>>> referencing it directly >>>>> should not make any difference. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On a side note, what does this have to do with Baremetal Advanced >>>>> Networking? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> commit 44a4158c4854d85e4c234655e375fe0c631507d5 >>>>>>>> Author: Frank Zhang <frank.zh...@citrix.com> >>>>>>>> Date: Thu Sep 25 10:35:33 2014 -0700 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CLOUDSTACK-6278 >>>>>>>> Baremetal Advanced Networking support >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hugo >>>>>>> >>>> >> >
