Hi Likitha, Can you please clarify below questions :
a. Does the ListNetworks API response gives the details of Persistent Network? b. When the account is deleted , Do we allow deletion of persistent networks created by this account ? c. Is there any change with persistent networks when Restart Network is triggered with cleanup=true ? d. Do we have support for network update from non-persistent to persistent network using network offering upgrade or vice-versa? f. Do we trigger the configuration @Netscaler while creating the persistent network itself ? g. How are we going to exclude persistent network not to shutdown with the GC interval configured? h. Do we support delete networks ? i. Any plans to new Alerts/Events ? Thanks, Sailaja.M -----Original Message----- From: Likitha Shetty [mailto:likitha.she...@citrix.com] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 5:08 PM To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Persistent Networks without a running VM Created the first draft of the Functional spec - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+-+Persistent+Networks. Will keep updating it based on the feedback. Thank you, Likitha > -----Original Message----- > From: Manan Shah [mailto:manan.s...@citrix.com] > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 10:26 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Persistent Networks without a running VM > > Chiradeep, Likitha, > > My take is that we need to support both kinds of networks (persistent > as well as non-persistent). Also, I don't think we can have this as a > zone-wide behavior because not all networks in a zone would need to be > persistent. > > For example, if you are deploying a multi-tier application, you might > only want the DB tier to be persistent. > > Regards, > Manan Shah > > > > > On 1/3/13 11:31 PM, "Ram Ganesh" <ram.gan...@citrix.com> wrote: > > >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 > >> >>+N > >> >>et > >> w > >> > >>ork > >> > >>s > >> > >> > >> > >>Regards, > >> > >>Manan Shah > >> > >> > >> > > > >
