Re: [MERGE] scaleupvm functionality branch to master

Alright Chip, I have pushed in the unit tests for CitrixResourceBase and will work with Prasanna to learn writing the marvin tests and will push them shortly as well. Lets please merge the feature as I think the unit tests should be good as first line of defense. I assure you that I will push the m

Re: Review Request: BUG-ID: CLOUDSTACK-1713, CLOUDSTACK-1719

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10047/ --- (Updated March 22, 2013, 6:26 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Chip Childer

Review Request: remove duplicated VPC router in return value of DomainRouterDaoImpl.listByStateAndNetworkType

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10062/ --- Review request for cloudstack. Summary (updated) - remove dupl

Re: [PROPOSAL] EIP across zones

On 22/03/13 3:26 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal" wrote: > > >On 3/20/13 8:31 PM, "Murali Reddy" wrote: >>>are outside of our control scares me. >> >>David, yes this is a valid concern. So, initially I was planning to >>leverage the ADC like NetScaler's routing capabilities to advertise >>routes. When IP

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-1368: Shared network - Not able to delete network because of java.lang.NullPointerException.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10061/#review18245 --- Commit 1c845d42b703bf4608873fd777b9bfef5d3feee5 in branch refs/heads

[ACS41][Patch Request] CLOUDSTACK-1625: NPE with updateResourceCount when && is passed thru API

Already checked in master. CLOUDSTACK-1625. NPE with updateResourceCount when && is passed thru API. If any API contains '&' i.e. no key value pair or '&' i.e. a parameter without a value, then we get an NPE as owasp.esapi.StringUtilities.stripControls deosn't handle NPE. Branch: refs/heads/mas

RE: [Discuss] ACL deny rules

Please find my response inline: > -Original Message- > From: Manan Shah [mailto:manan.s...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, 21 March 2013 11:05 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: Manan Shah > Subject: Re: [Discuss] ACL deny rules > > Thanks Kishan for sharing the FS. Below are some of

Re: Review Request: (CLOUDSTACK-1666) Fix NetworkUsage for VPC on KVM

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/9908/#review18244 --- Commit 0d604c636daed253f8d3034d8093e56f1ab85aff in branch refs/heads/

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-1714/CLOUDSTACK-1715: Updates to Install and Admin Guide documentation

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10045/#review18243 --- Patch cleanly applies on both Master and 4.1. However, I would let J

Re: Review Request: Bugfix CLOUDSTACK-1761: Fixed KVM plugin to return available storage which client is expecting instead of used

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10069/ --- (Updated March 22, 2013, 4:50 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack. Changes --

Re: Review Request: (CLOUDSTACK-1325) add password in response of RestoreVM

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/9539/ --- (Updated March 22, 2013, 4:42 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Sateesh Choda

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-1714/CLOUDSTACK-1715: Updates to Install and Admin Guide documentation

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10045/ --- (Updated March 22, 2013, 4:38 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Radhika PC a

Re: [PROPOSAL] EIP across zones

My assumption is that EIP for VPC should work exactly the same as EIP for Isolated Networks since EIP is like another Public IP except that it can be moved across zones. Also, we do support static NAT in VPC as well as Isolated. So, my thinking is that it might just work with minimal effort. Regar

Re: [PROPOSAL] EIP across zones

On 21/03/13 11:21 PM, "Manan Shah" wrote: >Thanks Murali for your prompt response. For the VPC part, can you explain >what is the difference between supporting on Isolated Network and >supporting on VPC? I would assume they should be very similar. May be I am >mistaken here. May be, I have not t

Re: [ACS41][Patch Request] CLOUDSTACK-1028 Fix documentation related to new egress rules feature

OK Chip! On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Chip Childers wrote: > Docs can be committed directly. Please do so. > > On Mar 21, 2013, at 11:27 PM, Jessica Tomechak > wrote: > > > I've made a commit to master that should be added to 4.1, please: > > > > b1e61cc94a6a4e3cf89a5fc345b54bfa36c6d4ec > >

[ACS41][Patch Request] CLOUDSTACK-866 Documentation for API Request Throttling

I've committed docs in master for the new 4.1 feature API Request Throttling. The eng bug for the feature is CLOUDSTACK-618, and the doc subtask bug is CLOUDSTACK-866. The commit hash in master is: 976a5fa788863cd955b279ae571c88c9f0ed1e18 Could this be added to 4.1, please? Thanks, Jessica T.

Re: [ACS41][Patch Request] CLOUDSTACK-1028 Fix documentation related to new egress rules feature

Docs can be committed directly. Please do so. On Mar 21, 2013, at 11:27 PM, Jessica Tomechak wrote: > I've made a commit to master that should be added to 4.1, please: > > b1e61cc94a6a4e3cf89a5fc345b54bfa36c6d4ec > > The section "Firewall Rules" seems to have been deleted when the new > "Egress

[ACS41][Patch Request] CLOUDSTACK-1028 Fix documentation related to new egress rules feature

I've made a commit to master that should be added to 4.1, please: b1e61cc94a6a4e3cf89a5fc345b54bfa36c6d4ec The section "Firewall Rules" seems to have been deleted when the new "Egress Firewall Rules" section was added for CLOUDSTACK-1028. The first section is about ingress rules, so I'm pretty su

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers - To remove Baremetal from UI

Please note that the sql changes Animesh mentioned are not part of the diffs.. Regards, Vijay -Original Message- From: Vijayendra Bhamidipati [mailto:vijayendra.bhamidip...@citrix.com] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7:54 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Chip Childers Cc: cloudstack-...@i

RE: Commiting reviews 10017 (4.1) & 10058 (master) for CLOUDSTACK-1537

Appreciate the promptness! > I can, but next time can we *please* either send out an "[ACS41][Patch > Request]" email OR add me to the review? Will do next time, thanks for the guidance! > -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Thursday, Marc

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers - To remove Baremetal from UI

Hi Chip, Animesh, I've posted the diff at https://reviews.apache.org/r/10071/ Regards, Vijay -Original Message- From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 6:04 PM To: Chip Childers; dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator

Review Request: Temporarily disabling baremetal functionality in CS 4.1

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10071/ --- Review request for cloudstack, Kelven Yang and Frank Zhang. Description ---

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers - To remove Baremetal from UI

> > -Original Message- > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:16 PM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Cc: Animesh Chaturvedi; cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers - To remove Baremetal

Re: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs

Hi Edison, I believe I understand the requirements for the plug-in better now. It sounds like the flow will be as such: * The user executes a Compute or Disk Offering that is tied via a storage tag to a Primary Storage that is associated with a plug-in. * The storage framework will ask the plug

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers - To remove Baremetal from UI

> -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:16 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: Animesh Chaturvedi; cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers - To remove Baremetal from UI > >

Review Request: bug fix for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1772

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10070/ --- Review request for cloudstack and Chip Childers. Description --- see bug h

RE: VNC listen address for KVM

I'll create a patch for it. > -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:19 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: VNC listen address for KVM > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 a

Re: [ACS41][QA] CLOUDSTACK-1764 needs someone to work on it!

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:03:43PM -0700, Min Chen wrote: > This is not an issue with code, template.properties in QA secondary > storage folder is incorrect, see below: > > [root@nfs2 3]# more template.properties > filename=c0c94bfc-15c2-4e7f-9a2e-aec541df4cc1.qcow2 > description=SystemVM Templat

Re: VNC listen address for KVM

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:11:56PM -0700, Edison Su wrote: > At least, need to revert the following change: > - GraphicDef grap = new GraphicDef("vnc", (short) 0, true, > null, null, > + GraphicDef grap = new GraphicDef("vnc", (short) 0, true, > vmTO.getVncAddr(), null

Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers - To remove Baremetal from UI

I'm +1 to disabling the function (including UCS), based on the info provided so far. Please provide a clean patch for the 4.1 branch to accomplish this. *After* it's applied, we should move the bugs out. Any objects from anyone? On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:11:36PM -0700, Jessica Wang wrote: > To

Re: [DISCUSS] NFS lockdown for SSVM

The SSVM is only an NFS client not a server. Which ports do you see open? On 3/21/13 3:31 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" wrote: >Looks like we have no port lockdown for NFS on SSVM, probably not ideal >when you want firewall and all port accountability. > >Before I cook something up and inject it into sys

Review Request: Bugfix CLOUDSTACK-1761: Fixed KVM plugin to return available storage which client is expecting instead of used

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10069/ --- Review request for cloudstack. Description --- Bugfix CLOUDSTACK-1761: Fix

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

> -Original Message- > From: Parth Jagirdar > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 4:40 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Animesh Chaturvedi > Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers > > Assuming we will have to disable Cisco UCS functionality as wel

Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

Assuming we will have to disable Cisco UCS functionality as well; as that would have some dependency on Baremetal. Is that right? CLOUDSTACK-723 Enhanced Baremetal servers support on Cisco UCS ŠParth On 3/21/13 3:00 PM, "Jessica

RE: VNC listen address for KVM

At least, need to revert the following change: - GraphicDef grap = new GraphicDef("vnc", (short) 0, true, null, null, + GraphicDef grap = new GraphicDef("vnc", (short) 0, true, vmTO.getVncAddr(), null, null); in LibvirtComputingResource

RE: Review Request: Make SHA256Salt the default password encoding and authentication mechanism for cloudstack

> -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 5:56 PM > To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org > Cc: Vijayendra Bhamidipati > Subject: Re: Review Request: Make SHA256Salt the default password > encoding and authentication

RE: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs

Feedback/comments are appreciated, need to know your input from storage vendor point of view. From: Vladimir Popovski [mailto:vladi...@zadarastorage.com] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:52 AM To: Edison Su; cloudstack Cc: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com Subject: RE: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin do

RE: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs

See below. From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:33 PM To: Edison Su Cc: Vladimir Popovski; cloudstack Subject: Re: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs Hi Edison, Can you get a little more into the details of how this framework works? For exa

[DISCUSS] NFS lockdown for SSVM

Looks like we have no port lockdown for NFS on SSVM, probably not ideal when you want firewall and all port accountability. Before I cook something up and inject it into systemvm.iso and submit a patch, has this been discussed? I want to get the community feel on this. I need to justify every

RE: Call for 4.2 and 4.1.1 Release Managers!

> -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:55 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Call for 4.2 and 4.1.1 Release Managers! > > Hi all, > > So I did the RM job for the tail end of 4.0.0 and obviously the ong

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers - To remove Baremetal from UI

To remove Baremetal from UI: (1) remove BareMetal from listHypervisors API response: http://localhost:8080/client/api?command=listHypervisors&response=json&sessionkey=DJBDo9h1ABqdqS97i%2B88wvK1n8k%3D&listAll=true&_=1363899049467 { "listhypervisorsresponse": { "count": 5, "hy

Re: [ACS41] Blockers for tomorrow's release

CLOUDSTACK-1764 is not a code bug, rather an issue with QA setup. Resolved it as "Not a Problem". Thanks -min From: Sudha Ponnaganti mailto:sudha.ponnaga...@citrix.com>> Date: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:27 PM To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" mailto:dev@cloudsta

Re: [ACS41][QA] CLOUDSTACK-1764 needs someone to work on it!

This is not an issue with code, template.properties in QA secondary storage folder is incorrect, see below: [root@nfs2 3]# more template.properties filename=c0c94bfc-15c2-4e7f-9a2e-aec541df4cc1.qcow2 description=SystemVM Template checksum= hvm=false size=741212160 qcow2=true id=NULL public=true qc

Re: [ACS41] Blockers for tomorrow's release

Just FYI, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1771 is not a blocker bug (double checked with QA, it doesn't block the regression test), and it's been in the CS since 2.x version of the code. I'll try to resolve it in a time manner though as its a real issue. -Alena. On 3/21/13 2:2

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

-Original Message- From: Animesh Chaturvedi Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:56 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org; Jessica Wang Subject: RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers > -Original Message- > From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chatur

Re: [PROPOSAL] EIP across zones

On 3/19/13 2:23 AM, "Murali Reddy" wrote: >On 19/03/13 4:08 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal" >wrote: > >>Thanks for this. I'd like to note that there is no evidence that AWS >>maintains a separate pool of "Elastic Public IP" and "Ephemeral Public >>IP". If we drop this phantom construct, then the featur

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

> -Original Message- > From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:22 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org; Jessica Wang > Subject: RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers > > > > >> > > > > >> > > I a

Re: [PROPOSAL] EIP across zones

On 3/20/13 8:31 PM, "Murali Reddy" wrote: >>are outside of our control scares me. > >David, yes this is a valid concern. So, initially I was planning to >leverage the ADC like NetScaler's routing capabilities to advertise >routes. When IP is transferred from zone to another zone, CloudStack will

Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > I am checking if these can be reassigned. If it does not pan out >> >> > > by >> >> tomorrow I will propose to disable the feature for 4.1 release. >> >> > >> >> > I think that a decision is predicated on a more spec

Re: Latest master build fails

The command should be mvn clean install -P awsapi,systemvm -Dnonoss I am not sure if you can use systemvm under -D. Thanks -min On 3/21/13 2:10 PM, "Francois Gaudreault" wrote: >On 2013-03-21 4:44 PM, Chip Childers wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:29:43PM -0400, Francois Gaudreault wrote:

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

> -Original Message- > From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:22 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org; Jessica Wang > Subject: RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers > > > > >> > > > > >> > > I a

[ACS41] Blockers for tomorrow's release

Below are the issues that are blocking tomorrow's release. Pl take a look at these. I have included Developers in the TO list, I have removed bare metal related issues from this list. Koushik DasCLOUDSTACK-1740 Failed to view console Min Chen

RE: [ACS42] VMware vNetwork Distributed Virtual Switch support in CloudStack

Major should be fine as it has usability impact. Let us leave the priority as is. -Original Message- From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:01 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Sateesh Chodapuneedi Subject: RE: [ACS42] VMware vNetwork Distrib

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

> >> > > > >> > > I am checking if these can be reassigned. If it does not pan out > >> > > by > >> tomorrow I will propose to disable the feature for 4.1 release. > >> > > >> > I think that a decision is predicated on a more specific statement > >> > of what we mean by "disable". > >> > >> Pingi

[ACS41] Review request for the fix - failed to download default template

Hi, Can anyone pick up the review for defect https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1252 We need this fix today Thanks /sudha

Re: Latest master build fails

On 2013-03-21 4:44 PM, Chip Childers wrote: On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:29:43PM -0400, Francois Gaudreault wrote: Hi, The master branch won't compile, and fails on the SNMP Trap module (SnmpTrapAppender test). The error is : junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: error snmpHelper list size not

RE: [MERGE] Support VM Snapshot

That's good, thanks for your response. > -Original Message- > From: Mice Xia [mailto:mice_...@tcloudcomputing.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:29 PM > To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org; Animesh Chaturvedi > Cc: Chandan Purushothama; Anthony Xu; Mice Xia > Subject: RE: [MERGE

Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] >> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:09 PM >> To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers >> >> On Wed, Mar 2

RE: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

> -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:09 PM > To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:01:45PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 20

RE: [ACS42] VMware vNetwork Distributed Virtual Switch support in CloudStack

Sudha, We can certainly lower the level - as its not breaking stuff. Its just initial addition of DVS based Vsphere cluster - will be painful - if you don't know the possible issues. I just don't want these issue to be dropped from the radar because they are deemed as "minor". Regards ilya

Re: VNC listen address for KVM

To be clear, it doesn't break consoleproxy for me, but it breaks migration as wido mentions in his long first post. I think he intended to fix it with the new libvirt 0.5.0 bindings rather than roll back, but it didn't happen before the cut. It should probably be rolled back on both 4.1 and master

Re: VNC listen address for KVM

The change was in server side code, so maybe. On Jan 4, 2013 1:09 PM, "Wido den Hollander" wrote: > Hi, > > I just noticed that CLOUDSTACK-411 got resolved which is related to > CLOUDSTACK-410 > > * > https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-410

Re: Latest master build fails

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:29:43PM -0400, Francois Gaudreault wrote: > Hi, > > The master branch won't compile, and fails on the SNMP Trap module > (SnmpTrapAppender test). The error is : > type="junit.framework.AssertionFailedError">junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: > error snmpHelper list

RE: [ACS42] VMware vNetwork Distributed Virtual Switch support in CloudStack

Thanks Ilya! These are logged as Major. Do you want to keep the priority as such. Hope no functionality broken significantly. -Original Message- From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:20 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Sateesh Chodapuneedi

Re: VNC listen address for KVM

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 02:27:48PM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote: > This is breaking 4.1. Should we revert the commit for this release? Perhaps. Do you think it's related to CLOUDSTACK-1740 though? I'd assume that this is a KVM change being discussed below, but 1740 is for Xen. Perhaps it's a co

Re: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs

Hi Edison, Can you get a little more into the details of how this framework works? For example, this is my thinking (using XenServer and VMware as an example): * You create a storage plug-in. * Primary Storage can be associated with this plug-in (as opposed to being associated with pre-existing

Latest master build fails

Hi, The master branch won't compile, and fails on the SNMP Trap module (SnmpTrapAppender test). The error is : type="junit.framework.AssertionFailedError">junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: error snmpHelper list size not as expected expected:<0> but was:<2> Thanks! -- Francois Gaudreau

Re: VNC listen address for KVM

This is breaking 4.1. Should we revert the commit for this release? On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 10:29 AM, John Kinsella wrote: > nice, hadn't considered ACLing that at the hypervisor level > > On Jan 4, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I just noticed that CLOUDSTACK-411 got

RE: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs

Yes, the plugin framework itself will work for all the hypervisors, but the plugin itself may be not. For example, if you are using per LUN per volume, I am pretty sure, VM live migration will not work for xenserver. From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] Sent: Thursday, Marc

[ACS41][QA] CLOUDSTACK-1764 needs someone to work on it!

Hi all, KVM agent dev folks - We need someone to take on CLOUDSTACK-1764 please! Summary: ListTemplateCommand failed with java.lang.NumberFormatException and failed to create default template The relevant part of the log seems to show that it's in the agent: 2013-03-21 04:40:08,130 DEBUG [agen

RE: [ACS42] VMware vNetwork Distributed Virtual Switch support in CloudStack

Hi Sudha and Sateesh, Logged 2 issues: VmWare DVS vmware.ports.per.dvportgroup setting not used https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1767 VMWare DVS - cannot use untagged portgroups https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1767 Regards ilya > -Original Message- > Fr

Re: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs

Very useful info, Edison - thanks!! By the way, can you confirm for me that this storage plug-in framework is expected to work for all hypervisors supported by CS in 4.2. Thanks again! On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Vladimir Popovski < vladi...@zadarastorage.com> wrote: > Hi Edison, > > > >

Re: How to remove Primary Storage / NPE in Maintenance mode

so cloudstack should be controlling your storage via the hypervisor. you'll need to check the health of the storage via the hypervisor. see if youre able to provision a vm to it. On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Vladimir Popovski < vladi...@zadarastorage.com> wrote: > This time I was unable to

RE: Call for 4.2 and 4.1.1 Release Managers!

Chip Would you please collaborate as to what release manager does. An examples would be nice. Thanks ilya > -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:55 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Call for 4.2 and 4.

Re: [ACS41] Baremetal blockers

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:01:45PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 02:41:01PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: > > We have 1 blocker and 4 critical defects on baremetal > > > > CLOUDSTACK-1610 Baremetal API addBaremetalPxeKickStartServer fail to > > prepare PXE server c

Re: [DISCUSS] Commit email notifications

I added some basic documentation on the specification and the available variables for use here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/docs/commit-emails.html If you guys decide on a new format throw it in a JIRA ticket and I'll make the switch. On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Noah Slater wrote: > Hey

RE: CLOUDSTACK-1747: fresh deploydb bug in 4.1 requires cherry-pick commits from master

> -Original Message- > From: rohityada...@gmail.com [mailto:rohityada...@gmail.com] On Behalf > Of Rohit Yadav > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:27 PM > To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: CLOUDSTACK-1747: fresh deploydb bug in 4.1 requires cherry- > pick commits fro

Call for 4.2 and 4.1.1 Release Managers!

Hi all, So I did the RM job for the tail end of 4.0.0 and obviously the ongoing 4.1.0 releases. Joe's been doing the 4.0.x bug fix releases. In the last IRC meeting I mentioned (and Joe said he was about to suggest the same thing) that I wanted to get someone else to step up to do the role for o

RE: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs

Hi Edison, Thank you for the reply. We will check it out. Regards, -Vladimir *From:* Edison Su [mailto:edison...@citrix.com] *Sent:* Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:36 AM *To:* 'Vladimir Popovski'; cloudstack *Cc:* mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com *Subject:* RE: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin doc

Re: Review Request: Added fix for default route issue in system vms

My concern is that it will only fix the problem 90% of the time, because we didn't wait 4 seconds. Then we bump it to 5, or 10, and needlessly delay the boot up. Its far better to take a few lines of code to verify you're ready before continuing than assume that some number of seconds is always eno

RE: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs

From: Vladimir Popovski [mailto:vladi...@zadarastorage.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 9:05 AM To: cloudstack Cc: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com; Edison Su Subject: Storage Subsystem 2.0 plugin docs Hi All, Thank you for a great work on CloudStack! We are interested in integrating CS with o

Re: Review Request: Added fix for default route issue in system vms

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10060/#review18223 --- Ship it! If this solves the problem, it's better to do it in this s

Re: How to remove Primary Storage / NPE in Maintenance mode

care to post your management server logs, after trying to perform the maintenance action. It should reveal an error and possibly clues as to why it doesnt want to transition your storage. On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Vladimir Popovski < vladi...@zadarastorage.com> wrote: > Hi Ahmad, > > Tha

RE: How to remove Primary Storage / NPE in Maintenance mode

Hi Ahmad, Thanks for the reply. I have no VMs in this setup. I guessed that storage removal option should be allowed after moving it into the maintenance mode, but this operations fails and it is stuck in "Up" state :-) -Vladimir -Original Message- From: Ahmad Emneina [mailto:aemne...@g

Re: [DISCUSS] Integrate Cisco ASA 1000v into CloudStack

My thinking is that most users would want the followingŠ 1. Either use VR for both FW and LB or use External Devices for both FW and LB 2. Lower priority would be to use VR for one and External Device for another 3. Between in-line and side-by-side, I think we should give higher priority to in-lin

[ACS41] Nicira NVP

Sander, Wondering if test execution is done for Nicira NVP [1]. I see test plan has been posted here [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Nicira+NVP Thanks /sudha

Re: [PROPOSAL] EIP across zones

Thanks Murali for your prompt response. For the VPC part, can you explain what is the difference between supporting on Isolated Network and supporting on VPC? I would assume they should be very similar. May be I am mistaken here. Regards, Manan Shah On 3/20/13 11:52 PM, "Murali Reddy" wrote:

[ACS42] VMware vNetwork Distributed Virtual Switch support in CloudStack

Sateesh, Can you check the comments in this story [1]. Ilya has logged couple of defects Ilya, Can you explicitly log the defects so that Sateesh can fix those Thanks /sudha [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-657 Thanks /sudha

Re: [Discuss] ACL deny rules

Thanks Kishan for sharing the FS. Below are some of my questions. 1. What is the default for an empty container? Is it allow all or deny all? 2. Can you describe the behavior for upgrades? 3. Can you also make sure that deletion of Containers will be blocked when containers are attached to Tiers?

Re: CLOUDSTACK-1747: fresh deploydb bug in 4.1 requires cherry-pick commits from master

Sounds good to me. Updated the bug as a Doc bug, and put this in the comment, and assigned to Jessica to put this into release notes. Thanks -min On 3/20/13 6:46 PM, "Alex Huang" wrote: >CloudStack's database is created using the 4.0 schema and updated to the >4.1 schema when the management ser

Re: Incorrect definition of lazy consensus in by-laws

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 05:08:26PM +, Noah Slater wrote: > I am going to bring this up with Hadoop! I'll circle back here afterwards. Works for me! Thanks Noah. Happy to do a round of adjustments as necessary.

Re: Incorrect definition of lazy consensus in by-laws

I am going to bring this up with Hadoop! I'll circle back here afterwards. On 11 March 2013 02:01, Chip Childers wrote: > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 06:52:46PM +, Noah Slater wrote: > > Devs, > > > > I was just reading through the by-laws we voted in (sorry, I am about a > > month late in doin

Re: Review Request: Summary: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1537 - Restart network with clean up set to true causes Autoscaled LB rule to get mangled and unusable

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10058/#review18218 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Chip Childers On March 21, 2013, 11:19 a.m.,

Re: Review Request: Summary: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1537 - Restart network with clean up set to true causes Autoscaled LB rule to get mangled and unusable

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10058/#review18217 --- Commit 61d8dde033317fe7559bebe0d050444ffc1fabfb in branch refs/heads

Re: Review Request: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1537 - Restart network with clean up set to true causes Autoscaled LB rule to get mangled and unusable

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10017/#review18216 --- Commit 61d8dde033317fe7559bebe0d050444ffc1fabfb in branch refs/heads

Re: Review Request: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1537 - Restart network with clean up set to true causes Autoscaled LB rule to get mangled and unusable

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10017/#review18215 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Chip Childers On March 19, 2013, 5:18 p.m.,

Re: Review Request: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1537 - Restart network with clean up set to true causes Autoscaled LB rule to get mangled and unusable

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10017/#review18214 --- Commit 886c3a56961c2ea941ca6f41af8e80afd3b50de7 in branch refs/heads

Re: Review Request: Summary: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1537 - Restart network with clean up set to true causes Autoscaled LB rule to get mangled and unusable

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10058/#review18213 --- Commit 886c3a56961c2ea941ca6f41af8e80afd3b50de7 in branch refs/heads

Re: Commiting reviews 10017 (4.1) & 10058 (master) for CLOUDSTACK-1537

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:49:06PM +, Vijay Venkatachalam wrote: > Reminder! > > Can someone commit the patch from review 10058 in master? > > Chip, > Can you commit the review 10017 in 4.1, this cannot be cherry picked > from master because of the health check commit

Commiting reviews 10017 (4.1) & 10058 (master) for CLOUDSTACK-1537

Reminder! Can someone commit the patch from review 10058 in master? Chip, Can you commit the review 10017 in 4.1, this cannot be cherry picked from master because of the health check commit that went in master. Both the reviews has already been marked for Ship! Thanks

  1   2   >