adietrich-ussignal commented on issue #10664: URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/10664#issuecomment-2781526544
Why is this not an issue? While I know ShapeBlue content is somewhat not considered fully tied to this project, this is in direct contradiction with this article: [Self-Service Shared Networks](https://www.shapeblue.com/self-service-shared-networks/). Additionally, why would the associated network piece become a requirement when it once wasn't? Why does the associated network piece need to be completed? There does not appear to be any reason there needs to be another network type tied to this. The issue this creates becomes broader as it impacts networks already deployed in production and causes a major shift for usage of the product in our case. Is this an incorrect understanding of how shared networks should work and that they should always required an associated network? I would at least think the logic should not mandate an associated network which appears to be missing in the most recent PR that pertains to addressing the prior issue with IP Ranges and specifyvlan=false. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
