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
Heya,
Took the liberty of copying the proposal into email as this makes discussion
much easier. Comment inline like a regular email.
> IPv6 Support
>
> 1 Background
> CloudStack does not support IPv6 today. Users/Customers are starting to ask
> for IPv6 support in CloudStack. With some us
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
32 matches
Mail list logo
