On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
wrote:
> I would assume a 'modern' OS as well. Centos 6.2 / Ubuntu 12.04 / Windows
> 2008(and above).
> Did you configure /etc/dhcpv6/dhcpc6.cnf with:
> duid LL eth0
Which guest OS/dhclient you're referring to?
--Sheng
>
>
>
> On 1/15/13 7:01 PM
I would assume a 'modern' OS as well. Centos 6.2 / Ubuntu 12.04 / Windows
2008(and above).
Did you configure /etc/dhcpv6/dhcpc6.cnf with:
duid LL eth0
On 1/15/13 7:01 PM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Sheng
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>> wrote:
You can if you assume that it is of LL-type. Windows req
;
>>> >
>>> >We'd like to have the work based on Chiradeep's network refactor branch,
>>> >but currently we're waiting for Javelin to be merged.
>>> >
>>> >And I am dong some PoC right now, so no code is written so far.
>And I am dong some PoC right now, so no code is written so far. I just
>> >found it's not that straightforward to get the dnsmasq work as we
>> > thought.
>> >
>> >We need DUID from client(not MAC) to hand out ipv6 addresses, but I am
>> > not
>> &g
forward to get the dnsmasq work as we thought.
> >
> >We need DUID from client(not MAC) to hand out ipv6 addresses, but I am not
> >sure if that's something we can know from mgmt server side.
> >
> >--Sheng
> >
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
&g
>--Sheng
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Hugo
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
>> Sent: vrijdag 11 januari 2013 19:50
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6
; Hugo
>
> -Original Message-
> From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
> Sent: vrijdag 11 januari 2013 19:50
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6 Support
>
>
> On Jan 10, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
>
> >
then.
Cheers,
Hugo
-Original Message-
From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
Sent: vrijdag 11 januari 2013 19:50
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6 Support
On Jan 10, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:57 PM, John
On Jan 10, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:57 PM, John Kinsella wrote:
>> From a quick glance at it's man page, looks like it can do v4 and v6
>> leases at the same time…
> You mean dhcpd?
>
No, dnsmasq looked like it could...
> I am exploring all the possibi
t; wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/3/13 3:20 AM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>>> From: John Kins
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:57 PM, John Kinsella wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2013, at 4:38 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 4:31 PM, John Kinsella wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Jan 8, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Sheng Yang
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If there is no other opinions, I would begin with DHCPv6
nsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 10:05 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6 Support
Good comments - keep 'em coming!
On Jan 2, 2013, at 1:01 AM, Hugo Trippaers
wrote:
Technically this is a very sound idea, but scale needs to
On Jan 8, 2013, at 4:38 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 4:31 PM, John Kinsella wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 8, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Sheng Yang
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> If there is no other opinions, I would begin with DHCPv6 in shared
>> network
>>> as first step.
>>
>>
>> Sure, one suggesti
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 4:31 PM, John Kinsella wrote:
>
> On Jan 8, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Sheng Yang
> wrote:
> >
> > If there is no other opinions, I would begin with DHCPv6 in shared
> network
> > as first step.
>
>
> Sure, one suggestion: I've been using ISC's dhcpd instead of dnsmasqas
> the
On Jan 8, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Sheng Yang
wrote:
>
> If there is no other opinions, I would begin with DHCPv6 in shared network
> as first step.
Sure, one suggestion: I've been using ISC's dhcpd instead of dnsmasqas they
have some silly limitations (in "test" but I keep meaning to contribut
t;> -Original Message-
>> >> From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
>> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 10:05 PM
>> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6 Support
>> >>
>>
o]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 10:05 PM
> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6 Support
> >>
> >> Good comments - keep 'em coming!
> >>
> >> On Jan 2, 2013, at 1:01 AM, Hugo Trippaers
>
On 1/3/13 3:20 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 10:05 PM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6
> -Original Message-
> From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 10:05 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6 Support
>
> Good comments - keep 'em coming!
>
> On Jan 2,
Good comments - keep 'em coming!
On Jan 2, 2013, at 1:01 AM, Hugo Trippaers
wrote:
> Technically this is a very sound idea, but scale needs to be discussed.
> Having static assignments in a database like we do for IPv4 could have
> potential impact as the address space available is multitudes
t;
> No upgrade scenarios need to be handled, as this is a new functionality.
We might need to consider a scenario where a user might want to add IPv6
support to an existing network. If we change service offerings to determine
support for IPv4 or IPv6 we need to convert existing network offe
r.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ASFCS41] IPv6 Support
>
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Chip Childers
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >&g
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Chip Childers
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/19/12 12:44 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Chip Childers
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/19/12 12:44 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
wrote:
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
wrote:
>
>
> On 12/19/12 12:44 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>> wrote:
Since it is a vast topic, I added subtasks in the Jira bug t
On 12/19/12 12:44 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>> wrote:
>>> Since it is a vast topic, I added subtasks in the Jira bug to make it
>>>more
>>> manageable.
>>>
>>>https://issues.apache.org
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
> wrote:
>> Since it is a vast topic, I added subtasks in the Jira bug to make it more
>> manageable.
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-452?subTaskView=all#issuet
>> able
>>
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
wrote:
> Since it is a vast topic, I added subtasks in the Jira bug to make it more
> manageable.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-452?subTaskView=all#issuet
> able
>
This is indeed a massive feature - are you sure that this is
a
Since it is a vast topic, I added subtasks in the Jira bug to make it more
manageable.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-452?subTaskView=all#issuet
able
On 12/19/12 11:40 AM, "Manan Shah" wrote:
>John, as you suggested, I have moved all of the requirements to the
>requirements pa
John, as you suggested, I have moved all of the requirements to the
requirements page.
Regards,
Manan Shah
On 12/19/12 11:29 AM, "John Kinsella" wrote:
>Personally I'd prefer to put all the info in one place - maybe copy the
>Jira content into the wiki page.
>
>Bringing dynamic routing proto
Personally I'd prefer to put all the info in one place - maybe copy the Jira
content into the wiki page.
Bringing dynamic routing protocols into the picture worries me, but I haven't
thought through the options, yet.
Will be happy to test as this progresses - my nets are v6 numbered already, bu
Hi,
I would like to update the existing JIRA ticket on IPv6 support and I have also
added a requirements page to track this feature. Please provide feedback on the
requirements.
JIRA Ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-452
Requirements:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/
33 matches
Mail list logo
