This one [1]? [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Roadmap
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 > -- Rafael Weingärtner
