OSDir


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] Blocking the creation of new Basic Networking zones


Wido, there used to be a page on cwiki with plans for 5.0, I can not find
it anymore but this should be added to it.

On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 6:42 PM, ilya musayev <ilya.mailing.lists@xxxxxxxxx>
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.
>
> How would we cover this use case?
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:34 AM Tutkowski, Mike <
> Mike.Tutkowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> 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" <Mike.Tutkowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     Sorry, Wido :) I missed that part.
>>
>>     On 6/20/18, 5:03 AM, "Wido den Hollander" <wido@xxxxxxxxx> 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
>>         might be a good time to bump it to 5.0
>>
>>         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?
>>         - Support ConfigDrive in all scenarios properly
>>
>>         How would that sound?
>>
>>         Wido
>>
>>         >> On Jun 19, 2018, at 3:17 PM, Wido den Hollander <
>> wido@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>         >>
>>         >>
>>         >>
>>         >>> On 06/19/2018 11:07 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
>>         >>> I like this initiative, and here comes the big but even
>> though I myself
>>         >>> might think it is not valid; Basic zones are there to give a
>> simple start
>>         >>> for new users. If we can give a one-knob start/one page
>> wizard for creating
>>         >>> a shared network in advanced zone with security groups and
>> userdata, great.
>>         >>
>>         >> That would be a UI thing, but it would be a matter of using
>> VLAN
>>         >> isolation and giving in VLAN 0 or 'untagged', because that's
>> basically
>>         >> what Basic Networking does.
>>         >>
>>         >> It plugs the VM on top of usually cloudbr0 (KVM).
>>         >>
>>         >> If you use vlan://untagged for the broadcast_uri in Advanced
>> Networking
>>         >> you get exactly the same result.
>>         >>
>>         >>> And I really fancy this idea. let's make ACS more simple by
>> throwing at as
>>         >>> much code as we can in a gradual and controlled way :+1:
>>         >>
>>         >> I would love to. But I'm a real novice when it comes to the UI
>> though.
>>         >> So that would be something I wouldn't be good at doing.
>>         >>
>>         >> Blocking Basic Networking creation is a few if-statements at
>> the right
>>         >> location and you're done.
>>         >>
>>         >> Wido
>>         >>
>>         >>>
>>         >>>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Wido den Hollander <
>> wido@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> Hi,
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> We (PCextreme) are a big-time user of Basic Networking and
>> recently
>>         >>>> started to look into Advanced Networking with VLAN isolation
>> and a
>>         >>>> shared network.
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> This provides (from what we can see) all the features Basic
>> Networking
>>         >>>> provides, like the VR just doing DHCP and UserData while the
>> Hypervisor
>>         >>>> does the Security Grouping.
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> That made me wonder why we still have Basic Networking.
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> Dropping all the code would be a big problem for users as
>> you can't
>>         >>>> simply migrate from Basic to Advanced. In theory we found
>> out that it's
>>         >>>> possible by changing the database, but I wouldn't guarantee
>> it works in
>>         >>>> every use-case. So doing this automatically during a upgrade
>> would be
>>         >>>> difficult.
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> To prevent us from having to maintain the Basic Networking
>> code for ever
>>         >>>> I would like to propose and discuss the matter of preventing
>> the
>>         >>>> creation of new Basic Networking zones.
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> In the future this can get us rid of a lot of if-else
>> statements in the
>>         >>>> code and it would make testing also easier as we have few
>> things to test.
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> Most of the development also seems to go in the Advanced
>> Networking
>>         >>>> direction.
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> We are currently also working on IPv6 in Advanced Shared
>> Networks and
>>         >>>> that's progressing very good as well.
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> Would this be something to call the 5.0 release where we
>> simplify the
>>         >>>> networking and in the UI/API get rid of Basic Networking
>> while keeping
>>         >>>> it alive for existing users?
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>> Wido
>>         >>>>
>>         >>>
>>         >>>
>>         >>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>


-- 
Daan