If this initiative goes through, perhaps that’s a good time to bump CloudStack’s release number to 5.0.0?
> On Jun 19, 2018, at 3:17 PM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: > > > >> On 06/19/2018 11:07 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: >> I like this initiative, and here comes the big but even though I myself >> might think it is not valid; Basic zones are there to give a simple start >> for new users. If we can give a one-knob start/one page wizard for creating >> a shared network in advanced zone with security groups and userdata, great. > > That would be a UI thing, but it would be a matter of using VLAN > isolation and giving in VLAN 0 or 'untagged', because that's basically > what Basic Networking does. > > It plugs the VM on top of usually cloudbr0 (KVM). > > If you use vlan://untagged for the broadcast_uri in Advanced Networking > you get exactly the same result. > >> And I really fancy this idea. let's make ACS more simple by throwing at as >> much code as we can in a gradual and controlled way :+1: > > I would love to. But I'm a real novice when it comes to the UI though. > So that would be something I wouldn't be good at doing. > > Blocking Basic Networking creation is a few if-statements at the right > location and you're done. > > Wido > >> >>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> We (PCextreme) are a big-time user of Basic Networking and recently >>> started to look into Advanced Networking with VLAN isolation and a >>> shared network. >>> >>> This provides (from what we can see) all the features Basic Networking >>> provides, like the VR just doing DHCP and UserData while the Hypervisor >>> does the Security Grouping. >>> >>> That made me wonder why we still have Basic Networking. >>> >>> Dropping all the code would be a big problem for users as you can't >>> simply migrate from Basic to Advanced. In theory we found out that it's >>> possible by changing the database, but I wouldn't guarantee it works in >>> every use-case. So doing this automatically during a upgrade would be >>> difficult. >>> >>> To prevent us from having to maintain the Basic Networking code for ever >>> I would like to propose and discuss the matter of preventing the >>> creation of new Basic Networking zones. >>> >>> In the future this can get us rid of a lot of if-else statements in the >>> code and it would make testing also easier as we have few things to test. >>> >>> Most of the development also seems to go in the Advanced Networking >>> direction. >>> >>> We are currently also working on IPv6 in Advanced Shared Networks and >>> that's progressing very good as well. >>> >>> Would this be something to call the 5.0 release where we simplify the >>> networking and in the UI/API get rid of Basic Networking while keeping >>> it alive for existing users? >>> >>> Wido >>> >> >> >>
