On 06/20/2018 08:42 PM, ilya musayev wrote:
> I think the simplicity of Basic Zone was - you can get away with 1 VLAN
> for everything (great for POC setup) where as Advanced Shared with VLAN
> isolation requires several VLANs to get going.
>
Does it? I have Advanced Networking running with ju
Hi all,
Just wondering if anyone submitted CFP here:
https://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/open-source-summit-europe-2018/program/cfp/
Sounds like an interesting place to present the products (ACS) - if anyone
interested, I'm happy to share the work(load) and present jointly, or
similar...
Hi All,
Sorry for the radio silence, I've been juggling the $dayjob and triaging bugs
and liasing with the fixers.
I'm going to throw in a -1 due to the following issues found:
Gateway IP not being reapplied when non-redundant VPC is restarted (PR 2712)
hosts can go into Maintenance despite VMs
I think the simplicity of Basic Zone was - you can get away with 1 VLAN for
everything (great for POC setup) where as Advanced Shared with VLAN
isolation requires several VLANs to get going.
How would we cover this use case?
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:34 AM Tutkowski, Mike
wrote:
> Also, yes, I
Also, yes, I agree with the list you provided, Wido. We might have to break
“other fancy stuff” into more detail, though. ;)
On 6/20/18, 12:32 PM, "Tutkowski, Mike" wrote:
Sorry, Wido :) I missed that part.
On 6/20/18, 5:03 AM, "Wido den Hollander" wrote:
Sorry, Wido :) I missed that part.
On 6/20/18, 5:03 AM, "Wido den Hollander" wrote:
On 06/20/2018 12:31 AM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote:
> If this initiative goes through, perhaps that’s a good time to bump
CloudStack’s release number to 5.0.0?
>
That's what I said in
I never meant for this thread to de-rail into what should be CloudStack
5.0 :-)
I haven't heard any objections against the creation of new Basic
Networking Zones being prohibited, but hey, it's been <24 hours since I
send the first mail.
Wido
On 06/20/2018 04:51 PM, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> Hi!
>
- When roles do not have access to some API methods, the buttons/links that
use these API methods should disappear from the interface.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Stephan Seitz
wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> > > With that we would:
> > >
> > > - Drop creation of new Basic Networking Zones
> > > - Suppo
Hi!
> > With that we would:
> >
> > - Drop creation of new Basic Networking Zones
> > - Support IPv6 in shared IPv6 networks
> > - Java 9?
> > - Drop support for Ubuntu 12.04
> > - Other fancy stuff?
> - Versioned API: keep v1 API (< v5.0.0) and create a v2 API >= v5.0.0
> where we fix all inco
+1
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Rene Moser wrote:
>
>
> On 06/20/2018 01:03 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 06/20/2018 12:31 AM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote:
> >> If this initiative goes through, perhaps that’s a good time to bump
> CloudStack’s release number to 5.0.0?
> >>
> >
> > T
On 06/20/2018 01:03 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>
>
> On 06/20/2018 12:31 AM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote:
>> If this initiative goes through, perhaps that’s a good time to bump
>> CloudStack’s release number to 5.0.0?
>>
>
> That's what I said in my e-mail :-) But yes, I agree with you, this
>
On 06/20/2018 07:53 AM, Rafael Weingärtner wrote:
> It seems so. It can then be a part of the PR. I mean, in the PR we could
> require a commit that updates this file.
Yes, that would be the thing. When you send a PR with a change that is
'big enough' you also include updating the Pending Relea
On 06/20/2018 12:31 AM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote:
> If this initiative goes through, perhaps that’s a good time to bump
> CloudStack’s release number to 5.0.0?
>
That's what I said in my e-mail :-) But yes, I agree with you, this
might be a good time to bump it to 5.0
With that we would:
- Dro
13 matches
Mail list logo
