Please find my answers inline.
Thank you,
Likitha
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sailaja Mada
>Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 8:49 AM
>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Likitha Shetty
>Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Persistent Networks without a running VM
>
>Hi Likitha,
>
>Can you please clarify below questions :
>
>a. Does the ListNetworks API response gives the details of Persistent Network?
[Likitha] Yes the response should say if the network is persistent or not.
>b. When the account is deleted , Do we allow deletion of persistent networks
>created by this account ?
[Likitha] Yes, both persistent and non-persistent networks will be cleaned up.
>c. Is there any change with persistent networks when Restart Network is
>triggered with cleanup=true ?
[Likitha] No
>d. Do we have support for network update from non-persistent to persistent
>network using network offering upgrade or vice-versa?
[Likitha] Yes, we will support both.
To expand on that, when a network offering of a network is updated from
non-persistent to persistent if the network has no running VM's then the
network will be implemented. Also during the next run of GC the network will
not be shutdown.
And when a network offering of a network is updated from persistent to
non-persistent if the network has no running VM's, during the next GC run the
network will be shutdown.
>f. Do we trigger the configuration @Netscaler while creating the persistent
>network itself ?
[Likitha] Yes, if the network being created is from a persistent network
offering, during the network creation all the relevant network elements
(including Netscaler if applicable) will be configured.
>g. How are we going to exclude persistent network not to shutdown with the GC
>interval configured?
[Likitha] While the Network GC thread is checking for all the networks that
have been marked for GC, the thread will also check if the network offering
associated with the network is persistent. If it is then Network GC will not
call for the network shutdown.
>h. Do we support delete networks ?
[Likitha] Yes. Same behavior as non-persistent networks.
>i. Any plans to new Alerts/Events ?
[Likitha] No new Alerts or Events will be generated.
>
>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
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >
>> >
