well, that one is a good one to update, but there was a dedicated 5.0 page at some time. I think we can just use this from here on in and merge anything else in it when we find it ;)
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 8:49 AM, Rafael Weingärtner < rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 > -- Daan
