Swamy, As mentioned in my merge request [1], I have generalised this feature and tried to not enforce AWS EIP semantics. Please see the updated FS [2]
[1] http://s.apache.org/xjy [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/portable+public+IP Let me know if you need further clarification. Thanks, Murali On 15/05/13 10:51 PM, "Venkata SwamyBabu Budumuru" <venkataswamybabu.budum...@citrix.com> wrote: >Hi, > >I didn't find the old mail thread about this FS. Hence posting my review >comments in a new thread. > >I have few queries/ comments after reviewing the FS [1] > >[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/CLOUDSTACK/eip-enhancements.html >[2] Prior discussion thread : http://sy.pe/6bNG > > >1. Are we providing any flexibility for admin to impose no. of EIPs an >account can use? >2. As per the Spec, when an instance has a public ip with >is_system=false, then we don't let user asosciateEIP. I feel, it would be >better if allow the user to associate EIP in this case? >3. When "Associate PublicIP" is false then are going to keep all the >semantics to stand the same except the fact that vm deployment by default >not getting the public ip? >4. Do allow CS to reprogram NAT rules on the provider in case of n/w >restarts? >5. Under Scope, point 4 says that we only support static NAT on region >level EIP. Is this true for advanced zones as well? we cannot we support >other services like PF / LB etc..,? >6. Can you confirm that we are supporting this for Shared n/ws in >advanced zone? >7. I see in the spec that "createElasticIpRange" API not having any VLAN >id. Are we supporting region level IP CIDR with both tagged and untagged? >multiple subnets in the same VLAN and different VLANs etc.., >8. When there is an ElasticIp associated with instance, Does the current >implementation release this IP and gives it back to account when VM got >to stopped state? if yes, does this mean user has to associateEIP every >time user starts instance? > > >Thanks, >SWAMY > >
