Wido, there used to be a page on cwiki with plans for 5.0, I can not find it anymore but this should be added to it.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 6:42 PM, ilya musayev <ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think the simplicity of Basic Zone was - you can get away with 1 VLAN > for everything (great for POC setup) where as Advanced Shared with VLAN > isolation requires several VLANs to get going. > > How would we cover this use case? > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:34 AM Tutkowski, Mike < > mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: > >> Also, yes, I agree with the list you provided, Wido. We might have to >> break “other fancy stuff” into more detail, though. ;) >> >> On 6/20/18, 12:32 PM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> >> wrote: >> >> Sorry, Wido :) I missed that part. >> >> On 6/20/18, 5:03 AM, "Wido den Hollander" <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 06/20/2018 12:31 AM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote: >> > If this initiative goes through, perhaps that’s a good time to >> bump CloudStack’s release number to 5.0.0? >> > >> >> That's what I said in my e-mail :-) But yes, I agree with you, >> this >> might be a good time to bump it to 5.0 >> >> With that we would: >> >> - Drop creation of new Basic Networking Zones >> - Support IPv6 in shared IPv6 networks >> - Java 9? >> - Drop support for Ubuntu 12.04 >> - Other fancy stuff? >> - Support ConfigDrive in all scenarios properly >> >> How would that sound? >> >> Wido >> >> >> 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 >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> -- Daan
