On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:11 AM, Murali Reddy wrote:
> On 01/04/13 1:47 AM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>
>>On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Murali Reddy
>>wrote:
>>> On 26/03/13 8:10 PM, "Adam Grochowski"
>>>wrote:
>>>
Hi,
So I'm curious - what is the proposed method to move a single IP
a
On 01/04/13 1:47 AM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Murali Reddy
>wrote:
>> On 26/03/13 8:10 PM, "Adam Grochowski"
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>So I'm curious - what is the proposed method to move a single IP
>>>across zones (presuming these zones span regions). As Chiradeep
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Murali Reddy wrote:
> On 26/03/13 8:10 PM, "Adam Grochowski" wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>So I'm curious - what is the proposed method to move a single IP
>>across zones (presuming these zones span regions). As Chiradeep
>>mentioned earlier, /24 is the largest block that wil
On 26/03/13 8:10 PM, "Adam Grochowski" wrote:
>Hi,
>So I'm curious - what is the proposed method to move a single IP
>across zones (presuming these zones span regions). As Chiradeep
>mentioned earlier, /24 is the largest block that will be advertised,
>so it would necessitate moving (or advertis
Hi,
So I'm curious - what is the proposed method to move a single IP
across zones (presuming these zones span regions). As Chiradeep
mentioned earlier, /24 is the largest block that will be advertised,
so it would necessitate moving (or advertising in two locations, and
back hauling back to one)
You have to unsubscribe yourself, check the link
http://cloudstack.apache.org/mailing-lists.html
> -Original Message-
> From: 김현일(Infra센터) [mailto:hyunil@kt.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 2:19 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] E
Hi
I don't want to recive this mail any more.
Thank you for your helpful tips and advices.
best regards.
-Original Message-
From: Murali Reddy [mailto:murali.re...@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 5:34 PM
To: Manan Shah; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL
On 22/03/13 9:37 AM, "Manan Shah" wrote:
>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
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
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
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
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
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
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:
On 21/03/13 3:10 AM, "Manan Shah" wrote:
>Thanks Murali for the FS. Below are some questions/comments.
>
>1. Is there a reason why we wouldn't support this feature for VPC?
Manan, thanks for reviewing. There is no particular reason, VPC would need
little different semantics we need to think thro
15 matches
Mail list logo
