Re: [DISCUSS] Blocking the creation of new Basic Networking zones
If this initiative goes through, perhaps that’s a good time to bump CloudStack’s release number to 5.0.0?
> 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.
>>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Wido den Hollander <wido@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 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
>>> 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
>>> 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?