I did notice one issue, but I don't think it's the cause because after
correcting it the system VMs still do not start.
In the wizard, I said I wanted to use local storage; however, I see the
system.vm.use.local.storage property was still false after my cloud was
created. I changed it to true and re-started the CS MS, but now I get an
exception and still no system VMs start:
ERROR [o.a.c.f.j.i.AsyncJobManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-9:ctx-5a124def)
Unexpected exception
java.lang.NullPointerException
at
com.google.gson.JsonPrimitive.isPrimitiveOrString(JsonPrimitive.java:316)
at com.google.gson.JsonPrimitive.setValue(JsonPrimitive.java:97)
at com.google.gson.JsonPrimitive.<init>(JsonPrimitive.java:67)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.JobSerializerHelper$ThrowableTypeAdapter.serialize(JobSerializerHelper.java:195)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.JobSerializerHelper$ThrowableTypeAdapter.serialize(JobSerializerHelper.java:158)
at
com.google.gson.JsonSerializationVisitor.findAndInvokeCustomSerializer(JsonSerializationVisitor.java:184)
at
com.google.gson.JsonSerializationVisitor.visitFieldUsingCustomHandler(JsonSerializationVisitor.java:204)
at
com.google.gson.ReflectingFieldNavigator.visitFieldsReflectively(ReflectingFieldNavigator.java:63)
at com.google.gson.ObjectNavigator.accept(ObjectNavigator.java:120)
at
com.google.gson.JsonSerializationContextDefault.serialize(JsonSerializationContextDefault.java:62)
at
com.google.gson.JsonSerializationContextDefault.serialize(JsonSerializationContextDefault.java:53)
at com.google.gson.Gson.toJsonTree(Gson.java:220)
at com.google.gson.Gson.toJson(Gson.java:260)
at com.google.gson.Gson.toJson(Gson.java:240)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.JobSerializerHelper.toSerializedString(JobSerializerHelper.java:65)
at com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:105)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInContext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:522)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:49)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(DefaultManagedContext.java:56)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:46)
at
java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(FutureTask.java:334)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:166)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1146)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:679)
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Cool...sounds good
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts on the system VM issue (with them not
> starting on Xen or KVM)?
>
> Console proxy is not in correct state to be started: Stopped
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> hey guys,
>>
>> have been sick in bed all day, sorry to react slowly. I saw your
>> explanation Marcus and I should check for the case that only one of
>> the two is null and return false.
>> I will update and if you haven't already I will put in a fix.
>>
>> regards,
>> Daan
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Marcus Sorensen <shadow...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > There are some other issues near that commit as well. A fix for
>> > CLOUDSTACK-5502 that makes 'untagged' invalid needs to be backed out.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Mike Tutkowski
>> > <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >> Yeah, this does appear to be a bug.
>> >>
>> >> I re-ran the attempted creation of my CloudStack cloud with a different
>> >> XenServer host and was left in the same state (NPE).
>> >>
>> >> I plan to try this with KVM tomorrow (er, later today, I guess).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> >> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Looks like Daan added the method:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=blobdiff;f=utils/src/com/cloud/utils/net/NetUtils.java;h=a315b935495469648a0a82a25c39c9c53f0226f6;hp=11a483c3f7e420056dce7893a86946de5c40e244;hb=94abbb1367bc817bae98f369e78679f0ddb7727f;hpb=6897984970df1455fa1ee0490157758ccfb68cff
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> >>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> OK, thanks!
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> shadow...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> git blame will show you the commit and committer.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >>>>> <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> > Yeah, but I wasn't sure of the coder's intend and if your
>> replacement
>> >>>>> code
>> >>>>> > meet their expectations, so I didn't change it. I was hoping
>> someone
>> >>>>> would
>> >>>>> > claim the code and chime in. :)
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 10:16 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> shadow...@gmail.com
>> >>>>> >wrote:
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >> Yeah, it would be clearer if they were checked separately:
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >> if (one == null || one.isEmpty()) {
>> >>>>> >> return true;
>> >>>>> >> } else if ( other == null || other.isEmpty()) [
>> >>>>> >> return true;
>> >>>>> >> }
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >> or something like that.
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >>>>> >> <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> >> > I should say this check doesn't have to catch it...it might,
>> but it
>> >>>>> >> doesn't
>> >>>>> >> > have to (depends on the value of one).
>> >>>>> >> >
>> >>>>> >> >
>> >>>>> >> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> >>>>> >> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>>>> >> >> wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >
>> >>>>> >> >> Yeah, in my case I'm just setting up a basic zone with a
>> XenServer
>> >>>>> host.
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> The code in NetUtils checks for null or "" on the variable in
>> >>>>> question
>> >>>>> >> >> that's passed in. However, in a certain case, null for that
>> >>>>> variable can
>> >>>>> >> >> slip by and lead to a NPE.
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> if ((one == null || one.equals(""))
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> &&
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> (other == null || other.equals("")))
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> {
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> return true;
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> }
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> if other == null, this will not catch it and it can throw a
>> NPE
>> >>>>> later.
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> >>>>> shadow...@gmail.com
>> >>>>> >> >wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >>> You can do "git blame (file)" and it will show you each line
>> and
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>> >> >>> commit. You can also do a git log on the file. The issue
>> may not
>> >>>>> be as
>> >>>>> >> >>> obvious as that, though, there may be something totally
>> unrelated
>> >>>>> >> causing
>> >>>>> >> >>> that object to end up null in this code. Or it may be
>> specific to
>> >>>>> your
>> >>>>> >> >>> setup, some obscure bug nobody else is hitting.
>> >>>>> >> >>> On Jan 1, 2014 4:22 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <
>> >>>>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>>>> >> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >>>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > This is in 4.3.
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > I know the file is NetUtils, but I'm not sure in Git how to
>> >>>>> look at
>> >>>>> >> the
>> >>>>> >> >>> > history of a particular file like I could do in SVN.
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> >>>>> shadow...@gmail.com
>> >>>>> >> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Which branch? I see these in master, you can check out
>> the
>> >>>>> commit
>> >>>>> >> just
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > before these and see if it helps:
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > commit b477e4e830597100f0c0171dd8e56f4033bd07aa
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Author: Daan Hoogland <dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Date: Tue Dec 31 12:52:51 2013 +0100
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > some xtra cases
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > commit 2cf356e047e26977c1d294fafc57e986c04fc5f4
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Author: Daan Hoogland <dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Date: Tue Dec 31 12:25:17 2013 +0100
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > isSameIsolationId
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > commit 04570eefed9a0ee1eca1fd700ed5732ba67150ce
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Author: Daan Hoogland <d...@onecht.net>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Date: Fri Dec 20 16:47:58 2013 +0100
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > check vlans and other isolation types
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > commit d50517e931e68daef6735bd18273499fee0d4649
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Author: Sateesh Chodapuneedi <sate...@apache.org>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Date: Tue Dec 31 07:16:35 2013 +0530
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > I also have a commit just after these, but it was pretty
>> >>>>> minor and
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > only to KVM agent code.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > Hey guys,
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > The NPE I saw last night was related to "isolation
>> id." Is
>> >>>>> it
>> >>>>> >> >>> possible
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > this
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > NPE is related to something new that was put that you
>> are
>> >>>>> talking
>> >>>>> >> >>> about
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > here?
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > Thank!
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > ERROR [c.c.a.ApiServer] (1583467451@qtp-185135566-2
>> >>>>> :ctx-ae5d80b2
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > ctx-5c12c4d9) unhandled exception executing api
>> command:
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > createVlanIpRange
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > java.lang.NullPointerException
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> com.cloud.utils.net.NetUtils.isSameIsolationId(NetUtils.java:1419)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> com.cloud.configuration.ConfigurationManagerImpl.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> createVlanAndPublicIpRange(ConfigurationManagerImpl.java:2474)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native
>> >>>>> >> Method)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:616)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at org.springframework.aop.support.AopUtils.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > invokeJoinpointUsingReflection(AopUtils.java:317)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > invokeJoinpoint(ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:183)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >>
>> org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:150)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at com.cloud.event.ActionEventInterceptor.invoke(
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > ActionEventInterceptor.java:50)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >>
>> org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:161)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> >>>
>> org.springframework.aop.interceptor.ExposeInvocationInterceptor.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > invoke(ExposeInvocationInterceptor.java:91)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >>
>> org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:172)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> org.springframework.aop.framework.JdkDynamicAopProxy.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > invoke(JdkDynamicAopProxy.java:204)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> sun.proxy.$Proxy96.createVlanAndPublicIpRange(Unknown
>> >>>>> >> Source)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at org.apache.cloudstack.api.command.admin.vlan.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> CreateVlanIpRangeCmd.execute(CreateVlanIpRangeCmd.java:211)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> com.cloud.api.ApiDispatcher.dispatch(ApiDispatcher.java:161)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> com.cloud.api.ApiServer.queueCommand(ApiServer.java:530)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> com.cloud.api.ApiServer.handleRequest(ApiServer.java:373)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >>
>> com.cloud.api.ApiServlet.processRequestInContext(ApiServlet.java:322)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> com.cloud.api.ApiServlet.access$000(ApiServlet.java:52)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> com.cloud.api.ApiServlet$1.run(ApiServlet.java:114)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> DefaultManagedContext$1.call(DefaultManagedContext.java:56)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > callWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > runWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > at
>> >>>>> >> com.cloud.api.ApiServlet.processRequest(ApiServlet.java:111)
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> >>>>> >> >>> shadow...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> That's just it. The isolation type *is* provided when
>> >>>>> creating
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> physical network. If I create a physical network with
>> >>>>> isolation
>> >>>>> >> >>> type
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> 'VXLAN', and then add traffic type of 'Public', it
>> doesn't
>> >>>>> obey
>> >>>>> >> it.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> There's physical_networks and networks, when the zone
>> is
>> >>>>> >> created,
>> >>>>> >> >>> an
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> entry goes in network that is Public/Vlan, hardcoded.
>> The
>> >>>>> Public
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> traffic type uses this, regardless of what the
>> >>>>> physical_network
>> >>>>> >> its
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> being added to says. So if we updated the the public
>> >>>>> network
>> >>>>> >> table
>> >>>>> >> >>> row
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> with the correct isolation method for that physical
>> >>>>> network we
>> >>>>> >> are
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> adding traffic type to when we add the public traffic
>> >>>>> type, that
>> >>>>> >> >>> would
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> work. It's worth noting that a zone can only have one
>> >>>>> physical
>> >>>>> >> >>> network
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> with traffic type of public.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Daan Hoogland <
>> >>>>> >> >>> > daan.hoogl...@gmail.com
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >> While I've got your attention, what's the deal with
>> >>>>> isolation
>> >>>>> >> >>> > method
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > vs
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> broadcast method? These are always set to the same
>> thing
>> >>>>> as far
>> >>>>> >> as
>> >>>>> >> >>> > I've
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> seen.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> > I've been asking this but haven't found the answer
>> yet.
>> >>>>> There
>> >>>>> >> is
>> >>>>> >> >>> an
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> > overlap but both have some extra values the other
>> hasn't.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> > I don't like either of your solutions but haven't
>> got a
>> >>>>> good
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> > alternative. Best would be to be able to set the
>> >>>>> isolation
>> >>>>> >> type
>> >>>>> >> >>> on
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> > each physical network on creation. The wizard and
>> zone
>> >>>>> >> creation
>> >>>>> >> >>> api
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> > command would have to be extended and allow for
>> vlan as
>> >>>>> >> default.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> > regards,
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> >>>>> >> >>> > shadow...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >> I suppose the answer might be to update the network
>> >>>>> with the
>> >>>>> >> >>> proper
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >> isolation method when the traffic type is added.
>> Look
>> >>>>> up the
>> >>>>> >> >>> > physical
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >> network's isolation method, grab network object
>> for the
>> >>>>> >> public
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > network,
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> and
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >> set the right isolation.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >> On Jan 1, 2014 12:46 AM, "Marcus Sorensen" <
>> >>>>> >> shadow...@gmail.com
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > wrote:
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> I ran into an issue today that I'm still trying
>> to
>> >>>>> wrap my
>> >>>>> >> >>> head
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> around, and I wanted to bounce this off of you
>> guys. I
>> >>>>> have
>> >>>>> >> a
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > physical
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> network whose isolation method is set to 'VXLAN'
>> >>>>> (v4.3+). I
>> >>>>> >> >>> add my
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> Public traffic type to it. I'd assume that nics
>> >>>>> generated
>> >>>>> >> for
>> >>>>> >> >>> > public
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> traffic would have the standard vxlan:// URI for
>> >>>>> isolation
>> >>>>> >> >>> URI
>> >>>>> >> >>> > and
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> broadcast URI, but they just have a vlan://.
>> Digging
>> >>>>> into
>> >>>>> >> it,
>> >>>>> >> >>> it
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > seems
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> that public traffic is hard-coded to
>> >>>>> >> BroadcastDomainType.Vlan.
>> >>>>> >> >>> I
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > fixed
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> this fairly easily for my testing, there were
>> only a
>> >>>>> few
>> >>>>> >> >>> places to
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> fix, by pulling the BroadcastDomainType from the
>> >>>>> network
>> >>>>> >> object
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > rather
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> than hardcoding it, but that found another
>> problem.
>> >>>>> This
>> >>>>> >> only
>> >>>>> >> >>> > works
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > if
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> I change the broadcast type in the 'networks'
>> mysql
>> >>>>> table by
>> >>>>> >> >>> hand,
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > as
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> during zone deployment the public network
>> creation is
>> >>>>> also
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > hard-coded
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> to vlan.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> I'm not sure how to go about fixing this, since
>> the
>> >>>>> >> Public,
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > Control,
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> Management networks are created upon zone
>> deployment,
>> >>>>> (see
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> createDefaultSystemNetworks). The immediate thing
>> that
>> >>>>> >> jumped
>> >>>>> >> >>> out
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > was
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> a config variable for public isolation method, set
>> >>>>> prior to
>> >>>>> >> >>> zone
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> deployment, or perhaps even one that overrides
>> what's
>> >>>>> in the
>> >>>>> >> >>> > table.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> While I've got your attention, what's the deal
>> with
>> >>>>> >> isolation
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > method
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> vs broadcast method? These are always set to the
>> same
>> >>>>> thing
>> >>>>> >> as
>> >>>>> >> >>> far
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > as
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>> I've seen.
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >> >>>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > --
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > o: 303.746.7302
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > Advancing the way the world uses the
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > cloud<
>> http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > > > *™*
>> >>>>> >> >>> > >
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>> > --
>> >>>>> >> >>> > *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>>>> >> >>> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>>>> >> >>> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>>>> >> >>> > o: 303.746.7302
>> >>>>> >> >>> > Advancing the way the world uses the
>> >>>>> >> >>> > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>>>> >> >>> > *™*
>> >>>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>>> >> >>>
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >> --
>> >>>>> >> >> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>>>> >> >> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>>>> >> >> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>>>> >> >> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>>>> >> >> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud<
>> >>>>> >> http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>>>> >> >> *™*
>> >>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>> >> >
>> >>>>> >> >
>> >>>>> >> >
>> >>>>> >> > --
>> >>>>> >> > *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>>>> >> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>>>> >> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>>>> >> > o: 303.746.7302
>> >>>>> >> > Advancing the way the world uses the
>> >>>>> >> > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>>>> >> > *™*
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > --
>> >>>>> > *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>>>> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>>>> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>>>> > o: 303.746.7302
>> >>>>> > Advancing the way the world uses the
>> >>>>> > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>>>> > *™*
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud<
>> http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>>> *™*
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud<
>> http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>> *™*
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> >> o: 303.746.7302
>> >> Advancing the way the world uses the
>> >> cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >> *™*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the
> cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
> *™*
>
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*
