Please ignore this email. Wrong mailing list :)
Sorry!
Praveen
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:16 PM Praveen Yalagandula <
yprav...@avinetworks.com> wrote:
> Siva,
> All changes for #1 are not in 17.1.8; there is a pull-request waiting your
> review for last few days.
> Note that
at EBSCO have also been put in place at LogMeIn?
>>>> The LogMeIn team is asking which Avi software version they should be
>>>> running for Platform9 integration -- I would think this would be the
>>>> patched releases provided to EBSCO--correct? Can we get validatio
Horizon side. There is/was a patch
>>> regarding a similar issue with LBaaS v2 resources too. It's likely just an
>>> incorrect assumption in the logic processing these names.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>> On 16 Aug 2016 11:03 p.m., "Zane Bit
Hi all,
We have developed some heat resources for our custom API server. We
followed the instructions in the development guide at
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/heat/pluginguide.html and got
everything working. However, the Horizon "Resource Types" panel is
returning a 500 error with "Template
uot; is the right parameter to define. Why do we need
"immutable"?
Thanks,
Praveen Yalagandula
Avi Networks
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@list
Zane,
Thanks for the reply; this is the information I was looking for.
Cheers,
Praveen
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:51 AM Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 11/04/16 14:06, Praveen Yalagandula wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are developing a custom heat resource plug-in and wondering about h
ship with
> Heat (add new properties while supporting deprecated properties for several
> releases).
>
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 1:06 PM, "Praveen Yalagandula" <
> yprav...@avinetworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are developing a custom h
sting resources,
whose definitions have been upgraded, need to be updated too. Was there any
discussion on this?
Thanks,
Praveen Yalagandula
Avi Networks
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe
heck if
>> there is any overlap that occurs within the cidr block. It only checks that
>> the fixed_ips+mac don't overlap with an allowed address pair. In your
>> example if the host has an ip_address of 10.10.1.1 and you want to allow
>> any ip in 10.10.1.0/24 to pass
itly allowed. What's your
> motivation for changing this?
>
> Aaron
>
>
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Praveen Yalagandula <
> yprav...@avinetworks.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Aaron,
>>
>> Thanks for the prompt response.
>>
>> If the overlap d
Hi Stephen,
If it is possible, can you please annotate the fields to distinguish the
required ones from the optional ones?
Thanks,
Praveen
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Stephen Balukoff wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Ok, I've attached a newly-updated object diagram (and its source) which is
> hopef
fixed_ip and mac_address pair as an
> allowed_address_pair would have no effect since the fixed_ip/mac on the
> port inherently allows that traffic through.
>
> Best,
>
> Aaron
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Praveen Yalagandula <
> yprav...@avinetworks
Hi Aaron,
In OVS and ML2 plugins, on port-update, there is a check to make sure that
allowed-address-pairs and fixed-ips don't overlap. Can you please explain
why that is needed?
- icehouse final: neutron/plugins/ml2/plugin.py
677 elif changed_fixed_ips:
678
13 matches
Mail list logo
