svenvogel opened a new issue #3824: clarify the usage of vlanipranges
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/3824
 
 
   <!--
   Verify first that your issue/request is not already reported on GitHub.
   Also test if the latest release and master branch are affected too.
   Always add information AFTER of these HTML comments, but no need to delete 
the comments.
   -->
   
   ##### ISSUE TYPE
   <!-- Pick one below and delete the rest -->
    * Bug Report
   
   ##### COMPONENT NAME
   <!--
   Categorize the issue, e.g. API, VR, VPN, UI, etc.
   -->
   ~~~
   list vlanipranges
   ~~~
   
   ##### CLOUDSTACK VERSION
   <!--
   New line separated list of affected versions, commit ID for issues on master 
branch.
   -->
   
   ~~~
   acutally master
   ~~~
   
   ##### CONFIGURATION
   <!--
   Information about the configuration if relevant, e.g. basic network, 
advanced networking, etc.  N/A otherwise
   -->
   
   
   ##### OS / ENVIRONMENT
   <!--
   Information about the environment if relevant, N/A otherwise
   -->
   
   
   ##### SUMMARY
   <!-- Explain the problem/feature briefly -->
   i dont know if its a bug but we encounter the following problem.
   
   if you create a physical network and and add 2 vlanipranges aka public 
addresses. 
   
   e.g.
   
   first network (ROOT)
   we have one network range "forsystemvms: true" and its assigned to the root 
domain
   ```
      {
         "account": "system",
         "domain": "ROOT",
         "domainid": "23462d06-b5a4-11e8-905f-525400ce8b0c",
         "endip": "192.168.1.238",
         "forsystemvms": true,
         "forvirtualnetwork": true,
         "gateway": "192.168.1.233",
         "id": "8aab7a4e-b20c-4f0e-b6a1-e0f6dbe6471c",
         "netmask": "255.255.255.248",
         "networkid": "0f0d66cb-f8f1-4e33-ad3a-ee2889bb0a09",
         "physicalnetworkid": "6ae13495-fad8-479e-b3f8-b2014fb8de63",
         "startip": "192.168.1.236",
         "vlan": "vlan://100",
   ...
   ```
   
   a second network (DOMAINX) assigned to other domain,  "forsystemvms: false"
   ```
     {
         "domain": "DOMAINX",
         "domainid": "9d77af79-5c87-4b73-b094-a106525803b6",
         "endip": "192.168.2.126",
         "forsystemvms": false,
         "forvirtualnetwork": true,
         "gateway": "192.168.2.65",
         "id": "a9db9833-4deb-4591-a860-e9d5f1d85ed5",
         "netmask": "255.255.255.192",
         "networkid": "0f0d66cb-f8f1-4e33-ad3a-ee2889bb0a09",
         "physicalnetworkid": "6ae13495-fad8-479e-b3f8-b2014fb8de63",
         "startip": "192.168.2.67",
         "vlan": "vlan://101",
   ...
   ```
   
   the problem which we encounter is that if there no addresses more left in 
"DOMAINX" network we encounter that the "ROOT" network is used. 
   
   is this a normal behaviour?
   
   ##### STEPS TO REPRODUCE
   <!--
   For bugs, show exactly how to reproduce the problem, using a minimal 
test-case. Use Screenshots if accurate.
   
   For new features, show how the feature would be used.
   -->
   1. create a ROOT network (set systemvm usage)
   2. create a DOMAINX network
   3. acquire additional addresses if there is no one more left in the DOMAINX 
domain and you get one from ROOT
    
   <!-- Paste example playbooks or commands between quotes below -->
   ~~~
   
   ~~~
   
   <!-- You can also paste gist.github.com links for larger files -->
   
   ##### EXPECTED RESULTS
   <!-- What did you expect to happen when running the steps above? -->
   
   ~~~
   normally only the assigned network should be used in the domain
   ~~~
   
   ##### ACTUAL RESULTS
   <!-- What actually happened? -->
   
   <!-- Paste verbatim command output between quotes below -->
   ~~~
   if network from "DOMAINX" has no more addresses it will use the "ROOT" domain
   ~~~
   

----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


With regards,
Apache Git Services

Reply via email to