Hi Prachi,
I had a question regarding your commit for CLOUDSTACK-1604.
I noticed that the HypervisorVmPlannerSelector run level is currently 0.
This didn't appear to cause any problems until the fix for CLOUDSTACK-1604,
where a dependency on the 'configuration' database table was introduced.
Conf
Cahill wrote:
> Hi Anthony,
>
> Adding you in CC in case you missed this message.
>
> We're trying to understand in more detail your plan for Security Groups
> support.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave.
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Mills, Joseph wrote:
>
>
Hi Min,
Looks like something possibly got lost in the merge? In a git pull from a
couple of hours ago I am seeing the following error on starting the
management server. Note the spelling of "Hypervisor":
java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
com.cloud.template.HyervisorTemplateAdapter
The issue is t
Hi Sheng,
I was looking into possible plugin combinations with the Virtual Router
network service provider, and I saw the restriction that VPN, LB, Firewall,
PortForwarding, and Static NAT on the VirtualRouter all require that the
VirtualRouter also be the Source NAT service provider. I am hoping
VPC
> offering. This has to be relaxed and createVpcOffering API should be used
> to make it configurable.
>
> ~kishan
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mills, Joseph [mailto:j...@midokura.jp]
> > Sent: Monday, 4 February 2013 2:42 PM
> > To: cl
as for SG enabled shared network, current plan is only support
> Virtual Router as service provider. If you want to add other service
> provider in SG enabled shared network, please file a feature request for
> it, and welcome work on that feature.
>
>
> Anthony
>
> > -O
I was looking at the FS for Security Group Isolation in Advanced Zone,
(CLOUDSTACK-737) and I noticed that:
"Only one network service provider is supported in advanced SG enabled zone
- Virtual Router"
Are there currently any plans to add pluggability support for Security
Groups in 4.2, and if so
udstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: VPC Functionality Not Pluggable
> >
> > Looks like a shortcut. Definitely needs fixing
> >
> > On 1/31/13 6:34 PM, "Mills, Joseph" wrote:
> >
> > >I was looking through the code that handles cr
I was looking through the code that handles creating VPCs and noticed that
it did not seem pluggable at the moment. For example, there are a few
places where the assumption is made that the only possible Vpc element
provider is VPCVirtualRouter:
protected VpcProvider getVpcElement() {
p://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-cloudstack-dev/201205
> .mbox/%3CB1DF26ECC0458748AC97CECE2DA98D41011D278DAB17@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite
> .net%3E
>
>
> On 16/01/13 11:21 AM, "Mills, Joseph" wrote:
>
> >I was hoping someone could clarify something I am seeing in
> &
I was hoping someone could clarify something I am seeing in
NetworkManagerImpl.java
I see that whenever we prepare a nic, we call element.prepare, regardless
of the ReservationStrategy of the nic:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-cloudstack/blob/master/server/src/com/cloud/network/NetworkManag
un everytime we do deploy database.
>
> I'll make the required changes.
>
> ~kishan
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mills, Joseph [mailto:j...@midokura.jp]
> Sent: Friday, 21 December 2012 11:58 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Databas
There is a database/code version mismatch that currently exists in the
master branch, and I was hoping someone might be able to provide some
insights.
The Database version is set to "4.0.0.2012-09-12T14:47:37Z" (in
create-schema.sql).
However in the top level pom.xml, the code version is set to
"
13 matches
Mail list logo
