I am trying to change EIP semantics supported by CloudStack for 4.1 release.
Today if some one deploys a basic zone with EIP service, then by default a
public IP is allocated for the user VM along with private IP, and then a 1:1
NAT is established between the public IP and private IP of the user
IP semantics change. Can anyone comment on
EC2 API use on basic zone with EIP service, are there any assumption made
that VM gets the public IP by default?
>
>Thanks,
>SWAMY
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Murali Reddy [mailto:murali.re...@citrix.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, Octob
CloudStack supports guest networks of type isolated and shared. While there is
rich support of L4-L7 network services like firewall, NAT, LB in the isolated
networks, similar network services are not available in the networks of shared
type. While there is EIP and ELB services which provides NAT
>associated with the network which caller is authorised to see.
>When listAll API parameter is set to false then API shall return the
>list of public IP's owned by the caller and associated with the network.
>
>We already have "associatedNetworkId" parameter in listPubl
On 19/10/12 5:46 AM, "Alena Prokharchyk"
wrote:
>On 10/18/12 4:59 AM, "Murali Reddy" wrote:
>
>>On 17/10/12 10:42 PM, "Alena Prokharchyk"
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Murali, some comments:
>>>
>>>1) "During netwo
implement
network or shutdown the network (typical operation in implement phase on
the back end provider in this case SRX, NetScaler, F5, Brocade etc would
be to set up the VLAN and assign a subnet IP or gateway IP of the shared
network on the device). Similarly when network is shutdown the VLAN and
I have added below dependency in plugins/event-bus/rabbitmq/pom.xml
com.rabbitmq
amqp-client
2.8.7
On 13/02/13 3:43 AM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Hoping that everyone that has worked on new features for 4.1 can take a
>moment to help ensure that we have properly accounted fo
ea3db2f073a5076d7822497a3032a0cd2d47a297
Author: Saksham Srivastava
Date: Fri Feb 22 15:46:45 2013 +0530
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 19, 2013, 12:57 p.m., Saksham Srivastava wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit
icDaoImpl.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/9396/#comment36076>
I do not see any use of this search by secondary IP set, when you are
passing the Nic id
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 19, 2013, 4:19 p.m., Jayapal Reddy wrote:
>
> --
trailing
white spaces. i see some commented out code, Plz remove them.
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 19, 2013, 4:19 p.m., Jayapal Reddy wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.
Hugo,
In the current model, components that are not needed by default are not
present in componentContext.xml. Just in case if you have not noticed, in
4.1, NiciraNvp bean is not enabled by default :). Admin needs to edit
componentContext.xml, to enable a optional component.
Thanks!
On 26/02/13
On 15/01/13 12:03 PM, "Anshul Gangwar" wrote:
>My comments inline..
>
>On 14/01/13 22:52, Alex Huang wrote:
>> Anshul,
>>
>> I had assumed that if you were doing this based on Murali's event
>>framework, it would not be architected on an adapter in the alert
>>manager but as a subscriber to his e
+Balancing)+Functional+specification+and+Design+Document
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-652
On 11/01/13 2:32 PM, "Murali Reddy" wrote:
>On 11/01/13 2:55 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the detailed and enlightening write-up
On 16/01/13 2:01 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
wrote:
>Murali
>
>Did you revert CLOUDSTACK-312 & 265? If not please do so at the earliest.
>Also please provide update on the code posting for community review as we
>have to get started on IP clearance quickly.
>
>Thanks
>Animesh
>
Animesh,
I have re
I guess this could be due to differences in ReservationStrategy 'Create'
and 'Start'. Both the strategies would need a prepare, but require release
only for 'Start' reservation strategy.
Please refer to [1] for explanation of reservation strategies.
[1]http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/in
I would like to call a vote for the Apache CloudStack project to accept a
donation from Citrix to support network services (PF, NAT, LB) in shared
networks of advanced zone.
The functional specification is available at [1] and has been discussed [2]
with no outstanding issues.
Patch [3] and MD
I would like to call a vote for the Apache CloudStack project to accept a
donation from Citrix to provide Optional Public IP assignment for EIP with
Basic Zone.
The functional specification is available at [1] and has been discussed [2]
with no outstanding issues. Bug 265 [3] opened to track th
c. Please check with Hugo if he had run into any issues
related to this behaviour.
thanks,
Murali
>
>thanks,
>
>Joe
>
>
>On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Murali Reddy
>wrote:
>
>>
>> I guess this could be due to differences in ReservationStrategy 'Create&#x
>
>So if I understand this correctly, the message bus is only used by the
>management server as a queue for events to forward to some other
>endpoint?
Chip,
Message bus is just abstraction (with publish, subscribe, unsubscribe
semantics), used to push action events, alerts, usage events and reso
Thanks for the review. Please find the comments inline. In this spec I
tried to captures what I think will be high level design of this feature.
Specifics on the finer implementation details will be clear as I progress
with development. I will update the spec when feature in decent shape.
On 18/01
As data centres get virtualised and edge services are pushed into virtual
machines for agility, traditional security practices (like DMZ) are
challenged IMO. A good 'defense-in-depth' strategy built-in to
architecture would be desirable. With the efforts in Javelin branch, in
near term it should be
On 25/01/13 11:21 AM, "li_fuqiong" wrote:
>Dear All,
>Does CloudStack support openflow? If no, is there any plan to support?
>
>Thanks.
>Mark
Its under progress
(https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/BigSwitch+Networkin
g+Plugin) would support floodlight and BVS.
urali,
>Thank you. will it appears in next version of CloudStack? When will the
>next version will release?
>
>Thank you.
>
>Mark
>From: Murali Reddy
>Date: 2013-01-25 14:34
>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; li_fuqiong
>Subject: Re: Does CloudStack support o
I would like to request merge of events framework [4] branch changes in to
master to branch.
I have proposed a while ago [1], about the need for a framework to
Publish-Subscribe CloudStack to events. Initially I was planning to use
simple in-memory based publish-subscribe mechanism using google ev
On 29/01/13 12:37 AM, "Frank Zhang" wrote:
>Sorry I may be late on this topic
>
>> Routing is designed to have the format.
>>
>> Event-source.Event-Category.Event-Type.Resource.ResourceUUID. For e.g.
>> A message is published with a routing key:
>> management-server:ActionEvent:SNAPSHOT-CREATE:S
>Murali,
>
>The use of Rabbit is still a question for me. It seems like you went
>with Rabbit, but the answer you gave as to "why" [1] didn't really
>answer the question or respond to the issue I raised about the
>practicalities of AMQP differences between versions and brokers [2].
>Can you addres
Kanze,
Thanks for the patch. On first look patch look good, but I will do a
detailed review tomorrow.
Meanwhile could you help me understand how the network is
provisioned/de-provisioned through the contrloller? I understand that you
plan to support Vlan isolation only for 4.1, so what is the ro
>Great to see this being close to coming into master! A couple of
>questions:
>
>1 - I don't seem to be able to find any new unit tests that cover the
>feature. Are there any that I'm missing?
I am working on unit tests. I will update the thread once I have unit
tests pushed to feature branch
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Potential impact and notes:
>>> * 4 new states are added to VM state Machine
Mice,
When the VM is in transient states (RunningSnapshotting,
StoppedSnapshotting), I see that you have taken care of vmsync. But have
you ensured that all the concurrent operations on the VM are blocked
cks the operation if VM state is Running, but
will succeed if the state is 'RunningSnapshotting' which is un-intended.
>
>-Mice
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Murali Reddy [mailto:murali.re...@citrix.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 3:12 PM
>
>
>Ok. this makes more sense as I think there would not be too many
>subscribers.
>So you would notify publisher that a new queue has been created? Otherwise
>how does publisher push the events out?
Generally idea of pub-sub model is that publisher/subscriber need not be
aware the existence of ot
rvServerDiscoverer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/9143/#comment34125>
How does find() launches the agent on Hyper-V host? I could not understand
how waitForHostConnect() will succeed.
- Murali Reddy
On Jan. 29, 2013, 9:43 p.m., Donal Lafferty wrote:
>
> --
On 30/01/13 2:24 PM, "Mice Xia" wrote:
>Agreed.
>Adding VM states are likely to have some side-effects, but for
>moveVMToUser case, does it explicitly reject other transient states such
>as stating/stopping/migrating?
>
>-Mice
No, it just accepts any state other than 'Running' (though it should
Chip,
Thanks for taking care of legal docs. I will include the legal
documentation when I merge.
On 30/01/13 8:10 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Chip Childers
> wrote:
>> 3) One of us has to take care of the legal docs. I'll actually take
>> care of it directly i
On 30/01/13 10:24 PM, "Rohit Yadav" wrote:
>Are you on Windows? If so cannot help you much, you have an evil
>development environment. Killing the process (task manager or
>otherwise) and starting the mgmt server after few secs may work.
I see it on mac as well :) keep running into 'out of memo
expect admin to setup the
necessary flow information through controller for shared networks?
Regards,
Murali
From: Kanzhe Jiang
mailto:kanzhe.ji...@bigswitch.com>>
Date: Thursday, 31 January 2013 1:28 AM
To: Murali Reddy mailto:murali.re...@citrix.com>>
Cc:
"cloudstack-dev@incuba
On 31/01/13 12:34 AM, "Frank Zhang" wrote:
>
>Sorry, I may have not made my question clear.
>Publisher doesn't have to be aware of consumer, but it must know the
>binding key.
>Now I reread the below statement I think I got your idea is:
>When subscriber subscribes an event, the framework creates
On 30/01/13 11:31 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
wrote:
>For the account sync, we can make use of the new event framework: instead
>of calling account sync inline with account creation, simply emit an
>event.
>The event can be consumed by the account sync service.
Chiradeep,
It's good idea to use eve
2:51 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 1/31/13 9:21 AM, "Kishan Kavala" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 31-Jan-2013, at 9:36 PM, "Chip Childers"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jan 3
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9131/#review15990
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 1, 2013, 1:03 a.m
/DeleteEgressFirewallRuleCmd.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/9236/#comment34293>
need entity type here as well
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 1, 2013, 6:48 a.m., Jayapal Reddy wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail.
not
applying. Can you please rebase to new master and the new patch.
Otherwise changes look good.
- Murali Reddy
On Jan. 31, 2013, 3:40 p.m., Likitha Shetty wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To rep
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9236/#review15994
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 1, 2013, 8:32 a.m
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 1, 2013, 9:22 a.m., Likitha Shetty wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apach
o you expect the guest_cidr's to be null after upgrade or same as cidr?
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 1, 2013, 10:34 a.m., saksham srivastava wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To
only from
the guest CIDR range when its different from the network CIDR?
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 1, 2013, 10:34 a.m., saksham srivastava wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit
On 06/02/13 4:12 AM, "Prachi Damle" wrote:
>
>As per discussions below, the scope of the feature now consists of a
>generic framework for defining affinity groups in CloudStack and a
>default implementation to support host affinity and anti-affinity.
Prachi,
When the granularity of affinity/ant
he network, that is inclusive
of guest_vm_cidr and IP address that can be allocated out side cloudstack
setup/db/db/schema-40to410.sql
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/9180/#comment34900>
you should be using 4.1 to 4.2 upgrade script
- Murali Reddy
On Feb. 8, 2013, 9:39 a.m., Saksham
Alena,
I have couple of queries on the requirements listed in the spec.
- "Shared Zone Wide SG Enabled Guest network is required in Advance SG
enabled zone as CPVM/SSVM are using it."
I am not clear why CPVM/SSVM will use the shared guest network with SG.
- "No Isolated networks can be added
On 16/10/12 8:27 PM, "Murali Reddy" wrote:
>CloudStack supports guest networks of type isolated and shared. While
>there is rich support of L4-L7 network services like firewall, NAT, LB in
>the isolated networks, similar network services are not available in the
>networks
I would like to work on enhancing EIP/ELB functionality present in
CloudStack, so that highly available and fault-tolerant application can be
architected using CloudStack deployments at a region level. EIP and ELB
are both AWS networking features that help building fault-tolerant, highly
available
I am splitting up my original proposal [1] so as to discuss each feature
independently. Please refer to the bug description [2] for the EIP
enhancements I am planning to do. As mentioned earlier first I am planning
to do a POC, but couple of issues that I want to bring it up for
discussion.
-IMU,
On 19/12/12 1:59 PM, "Anshul Gangwar" wrote:
>Hi Murali,
>Where can I find the FS for feature Event Notification Framework?
>What part of code your changes will go and how they will affect my work?
>Thanks
>Anshul
Anshul,
FS is not unto date yet, but you can refer to [1]. You can also refer to
>
>Hey Murali,
>
>Great to hear about where you stand right now. Is the code (work in
>progress obviously) available on one of the branches? I'd love to
>take a look at it.
>
>-chip
>
Chip
I have been using 'events-framework' branch for this work. Please take a
look at 'framework/events/src/o
On 22/12/12 5:13 AM, "Prasanna Santhanam"
wrote:
>On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 04:54:54AM +0530, Manan Shah wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to propose a new feature for adding external LB support
>> to Shared Networks. I have created a JIRA ticket and provided the
>> requirements at the following lo
On 03/01/13 12:33 AM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>Interesting stuff. How and why did you decide on RabbitMQ?
David,
Default plug-in I am adding for event bus assumes AMQP. I have used
RabbitMQ AMQP client. But the AMQP server it self could be any
implementation of AMQP. Though I have not tested, Rabb
Great to see this proposal. Do you intend to keep plug-in compatible only
with BVS application or will it work with FloodLight controller as well?
On 03/01/13 11:50 AM, "Kanzhe Jiang" wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Happy New Year to Everyone!
>First of all, I am new to the community and very excited to have
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/8432/#review15109
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Murali Reddy
On Dec. 8, 2012, 4:18 p.m
Done. Pushed to both 4.0 and master branch.
On 04/01/13 8:54 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>Kelvin / Murali,
>
>You guys are listed as specific reviewers for Koushik's patch. If you
>are the appropriate folks, can we please get this done today? If not,
>please say so...
>
>Joe's trying to get a 4
notification service it self, need not be
part of CloudStack.
>
>> On 12/20/12 3:46 AM, "Murali Reddy" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hey Murali,
>>>>
>>>>Great to hear about where you stand right now. Is the code (work in
>&
In continuation to my proposal [1], I am brining GSLB support
separately for discussion. I have put up functional specification and
design documentation at [2]. Please provide feedback, comments.
Quick abstract of the feature:
Today CloudStack supports load balancing traffic across the VM instanc
On 08/01/13 2:35 PM, "Likitha Shetty" wrote:
>In the FS I have proposed we use the 'persistent' flag with the API's. I
>have added this item under 'Open Issues' for now. Will update the FS
>based on the discussion in this list.
>
>Since a network offering is used by an admin to define the feature
On 09/01/13 8:36 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>
>CLOUDSTACK-777
>This is in the CloudPlatform 3.0.6 release
>Docs already submitted, but no FS available.
>Unable to find dev list discussion
I believe reporter of CLOUDSTACK-777 mistakenly opened duplicate of the
bug [1]. FS for bug 312 is at [2] an
>
>Unfortunately the VirtualNetworkApplianceManager behaves both as a plugin
>and an orchestrator making it a bad example of how to develop a network
>plugin.
Chiradeep,
If time permits I was planning to partially clean-up
VirtualNetworkApplianceManager as part of the CLOUDSTACK-655 [1] which i
On 10/01/13 8:16 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:00 AM, Murali Reddy
>wrote:
>> On 09/01/13 8:36 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>>>
>>>CLOUDSTACK-777
>>>This is in the CloudPlatform 3.0.6 release
>>>Doc
is not
>missed. What ends up happening is that there's a lot of information, but
>incoherently organized. Nice job.
>
>
>On 1/8/13 12:52 PM, "Murali Reddy" wrote:
>
>>In continuation to my proposal [1], I am brining GSLB support
>>separately for discussion
On 06/03/13 11:52 PM, "Kelven Yang" wrote:
>First +1 on BVT.
>
>Second, should we consider the idea of having a staging area for people to
>check-in? Which is that making master always the stable(reasonable) branch
>for main development, but whenever people make check-ins, it goes into
>staging
Also with out staging, features developed by non-commiters else where,
even with good code review in place there is always possibility of
regression after feature merge into master.
On 07/03/13 10:41 AM, "Murali Reddy" wrote:
>On 06/03/13 11:52 PM, "Kelven Yang" wro
: 2feda05ecd15d7fe63bd986868de2844340acec6
Parents: b4bab5a
Author: Murali Reddy mailto:murali.re...@citrix.com>>
Authored: Wed Mar 13 17:17:12 2013 +0530
Committer: Murali Reddy
mailto:murali.re...@citrix.com>>
Committed: Wed Mar 13 17:30:15 2013 +0530
On 13/03/13 3:14 PM, "Donal Lafferty" wrote:
>
>WRT #2: C# code on a .NET framework classes is a well-supported
>implementation option. The code's copyright would be held by Apache
>CloudStack. The libraries on which it depended would be proprietary to
>Microsoft (.NET Runtime, and ASP.NET Web
I would like to propose enhancing current EIP functionality (currently
available in basic zone). I have made a case for this feature earlier [2] and
captured requirements in the feature bug [2]. This proposal would like to
introduce following functionality.
1. EIP service with in 'advanced'
On 16/03/13 1:46 AM, "Will Stevens" wrote:
>
>1. Restrict the available subnets for each account so two accounts can't
>create overlapping subnets.
>To me, this breaks the whole concept of cloud, but for enterprise
>customers
>this is not a huge limitation because they usually solve this problem t
the IP
address allocation is scattered then how does routing will work? If
CloudStack just assumes that public IP (non RFC 1918) can be
moved/allocated across the zones, then (irrespective of EIP service is
enabled or not) we have can public IP pools configured at region level.
But question is, is it
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10021/
---
Review request for cloudstack and Murali Reddy.
Description
---
Merge
I would like to merge GSLB feature proposed [1] and developed in the feature
branch [2] into master. Code for this feature pretty much conforms to what was
proposed in FS [3]. I added unit tests for all the new service layer methods
introduced[4]. I have made the patch available at [5], if any o
ment38270>
>
>Create in remove path?
>
>
>
>plugins/network-elements/netscaler/src/com/cloud/network/resource/Netscale
>rResource.java
><https://reviews.apache.org/r/10021/#comment38271>
>
>This is taken care alre
Kelven, I see that you fixed action event issue in below commit. But I am
still running into some issues. While working on CLOUDSTACK-1673 I noticed
that in case of AccountManagerImpl, there are multiple methods with same
name. So in that case getAnnotation on the method is returning null even
tho
, Domain Id:1| 2 | 1 | 1 |
>2013-03-21 05:24:45 | INFO |0 | NULL |0 |
>
>
>-Thanks
>Sangeetha
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Murali Reddy [mailto:murali.re...@citrix.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 7:18 AM
>
>
>This assumes that there is a common pool of IP addresses available -
>which assumes things like BGP are in place and routing packets between
>multiple datacenters/providers and that you are interacting with BGP
>properly.
>
>I'll be frank and say that the complexity and interaction with systems
In continuation to what Alex proposed, as a first step I am moving
out components that are not core to the CloudStack into a physically
separate jar's and in to a different projects. Please look at [1] for what
components are being moved and corresponding new location. Next few days I
will moving
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/5659/#review8749
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Murali Reddy
On June 29, 2012, 10:06 a.m
Hugo,
Thanks for submitting a detailed patch with API changes, functional test
steps etc. I maintain the "Network Element" modules of CloudStack will get
started on the review of the patch. I might need to pull in other module
owners of (CitrixResource, NetWorkGuru, NetworkManager) for review if
r
Currently CloudStack has dependencies on third party software that are under
'excluded license' [1] or does not fall under category A/B licenses. While
effort in underway [2] to remove the dependencies, I want to bring to the
discussion on what is the best approach for CloudStack to remove the
On 02/07/12 6:29 AM, "Hugo Trippaers"
wrote:
>
>
>> On July 2, 2012, 1:02 p.m., David Nalley wrote:
>> > Murali, Chiradeep: You guys have been the ones working on the plugin
>>stuff - is this your intent that all of the plugins would be bundled in
>>-server?
>> >
>> > --David
>
>I hope the answ
On 02/07/12 9:58 AM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>
>For instance, we removed jnetpcap altogether as we weren't using it;
>do we continue with a dependency on the VMware SDK or do we instead
>rip it out and replace it entirely with something else? Is Paramiko
>really used or not?
>
>--David
>
I can spe
h Xen? or works with Kvm, Vmware as well?
- Murali Reddy
On June 26, 2012, 4:56 p.m., Hugo Trippaers wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/5590/#review9036
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Murali Reddy
On July 8, 2012, 7:20 p.m., Hugo
Hugo,
I reviewed the patch and its good to go into master. I will get the patch
integrated into master branch. Can you please do below tasks to conclude
phase 1 effort.
- Since there in no flexibility to tag VIF's as Nicira integration would
want, we can leave the changes you done in the CitrixRe
On 26/07/12 8:43 PM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Edison Su wrote:
>> As kvm code depends on libvirt-java, which is incompatible with Apache
>>license. I want to move it to plugin folder as we already did for other
>>hypervisors, and add a compile option to turn on/off
On 28/07/12 5:31 AM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>Hi folks:
>
>I am working on removing all of the jar files under deps/ and creating
>an ant target to acquire them, etc.
>
>However, I just came across something that I wonder if there is a
>reason behind.
>
>For the target build-all it depends on a num
On 07/08/12 12:11 PM, "Tomoe Sugihara" wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Alex Huang wrote:
>>> I have looked at the code more in detail and found a bit tricky thing.
>>>
>>> Inside the createVif() method, it calls getNetwork(conn, nic) to set
>>> vifr.network record. And inside getNetwork(
On 07/08/12 3:35 PM, "Alessandro Pilotti" wrote:
>Hi guys,
>
>we have some trouble with NFS to access the secondary storage as we are
>targetting Hyper-V server which, unlike Windows Server, doesn't have a
>native NFS client.
>
>How hard do you guys think it would be to add CIFS as an alternative
On 08/08/12 1:16 PM, "Tomoe Sugihara" wrote:
>
>---
>This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
>https://reviews.apache.org/r/6464/
>---
>
>Review request for cloudstac
Thanks for submitting patch. I took a quick look at the patch in general
things look good. It would be better if you can give quick context on the
ADX capabilities for better deatiled review. Some question I had was does
ADX has a virtual appliance? NAT capabilities? Also where do you want to
posi
In continuation to the disucssion [1] to have publisher/subscriber event
notification mechanism in CloudStack I am proposing a framework for
delivering events to the in-process subscribers. This is slightly
in-contrast to the earlier discussion to have native rich notification
(callback, SMS, emai
On 09/08/12 5:01 AM, "Krishna Sadasivam" wrote:
>
>plugins/network-elements/brocade/test/com/cloud/network/element/Base64.jav
>a PRE-CREATION
Should Base64.java be of concern from ASF license perspective? I think
Alex removed it [1] from the repo and this patch will re-introduce if it
goes to
On 10/08/12 6:50 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>
>Murali,
>
>I really like this approach, and will be willing to step in and
>implement the AMQP plugin after the initial framework is in place.
Great! I will let you know once framework is in place.
>
>As for the design itself, one thing I didn't qu
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/6464/#review10213
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Murali Reddy
On Aug. 9, 2012, 9:10 a.m
On 16/08/12 5:55 AM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>The only hesitation that I have is around ease of installation /
>configuration. CloudStack is great at this today (one of the reasons
>that my company gravitated to it), and I don't want to lose that
>value. I don't think this is a blocker to distr
Are you using ASF repo or other git repo? If you are not particular on
3.0.2 Please use master branch on ASF repo [1].
Code has been re-structured to make plug-in development easier. You can
take example of random host allocator at 'plugins/host-allocators/random'
to create your own plugin. Add t
1 - 100 of 165 matches
Mail list logo
