Does it make sense to introduce the flag(persistent) as part of NetworkOffering?
Thanks, RamG > -----Original Message----- > From: Likitha Shetty [mailto:likitha.she...@citrix.com] > Sent: 03 January 2013 18:05 > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Persistent Networks without a running VM > > Please find my answers and queries inline. > > Thank you, > Likitha > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com] > > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 1:03 PM > > To: CloudStack DeveloperList > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Persistent Networks without a running VM > > > > So: > > 1. There needs to be both kinds of networks available (persistent as > well as non- > > persistent) in the same zone? > Yes > > > From an end-user perspective this is going to be confusing since she > has not > > been exposed to this internal state before (and generally the end- > user is not > > aware of the internal state of the infrastructure). > +1. Say we have a new API 'ProvisionNetwork' to provision a network > that has been created by the user. Since the user is not aware of the > internal state of a network it would be confusing for the user to > understand the difference b/w the 2 API's, CreateNetwork and > ProvisionNetwork. > > > Is it OK to make this behavior > > zone-wide, I.e., on every guest network? > But this would mean having all networks (in the zone which has this > behavior enabled) in an implemented state, even if a network has no > physical device or VM deployed in it. This is changing the default CS > behavior of not having resources allocated to a network if the network > doesn't require it. Is that acceptable ? > > > > > > > On 12/31/12 10:19 AM, "Manan Shah" <manan.s...@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > >Thanks Likitha for picking up this requirement. You have correctly > > >interpreted the requirements. > > > > > >Regards, > > >Manan Shah > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >On 12/31/12 2:52 AM, "Likitha Shetty" <likitha.she...@citrix.com> > wrote: > > > > > >>Hi, > > >> > > >>I would like to work on the proposed feature. > > >>Restating the requirement. Currently in CloudStack when a user > creates > > >>a network, a db entry for that network is made, a VLAN ID is > assigned > > >>and the network is created only when the first VM on that network > is > > created. > > >>With this feature CloudStack should allow users to provision the > > >>created network i.e. assign a VLAN ID and implement the network > > >>without having to deploy VM's on that network. > > >> > > >>Comments/Suggestions on the requirement ? > > >> > > >>Thank you, > > >>Likitha > > >> > > >>-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Manan Shah [mailto:manan.s...@citrix.com] > > >>Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 7:01 AM > > >>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > >>Subject: [DISCUSS] Persistent Networks without a running VM > > >> > > >>Hi, > > >> > > >>I would like to propose a new feature for persistent networks > without > > >>running VMs. I have created a JIRA ticket and provided the > > >>requirements at the following location. Please provide feedback on > the > > requirements. > > >> > > >>JIRA Ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-706 > > >>Requirements: > > > >>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Persistent+Net > w > > >>ork > > >>s > > >> > > >>Regards, > > >>Manan Shah > > >> > > >
