Re: Does Apache CloudStack 4.9 support Ubuntu Precise?

2017-01-17 Thread Gabriel Beims Bräscher 

Thanks Wido!


Em 17/01/2017 17:01, Wido den Hollander escreveu:

Op 17 januari 2017 om 4:43 schreef Gabriel Beims Bräscher 
:


Hello,

Does Apache CloudStack 4.9 support Ubuntu Precise?

I am asking it because the upgrade documentation [1] (Upgrade
Instruction from 4.6) points the CloudStack apt repository as "deb
http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/ubuntu precise 4.9"; however, the latest
version available for Ubuntu Precise is 4.8 [2].


The packages were not uploaded there by Jenkins, but afaik it will work on 12.04

4.10 will no longer work due to Java 8. I will copy the 4.9 packages to precise.

Wido


I think that we should either update the documentation or add the 4.9
package repository for the Precise distribution.

A mail that already reported it before [3].

Cheers,
Gabriel.

[1]
http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/projects/cloudstack-release-notes/en/4.9.0/upgrade/upgrade-4.6.html
[2] http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/ubuntu/dists/precise/
[3] https://www.mail-archive.com/users@cloudstack.apache.org/msg21175.html

Re: Does Apache CloudStack 4.9 support Ubuntu Precise?

2017-01-17 Thread Wido den Hollander 

> Op 17 januari 2017 om 4:43 schreef Gabriel Beims Bräscher 
> :
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Does Apache CloudStack 4.9 support Ubuntu Precise?
> 
> I am asking it because the upgrade documentation [1] (Upgrade 
> Instruction from 4.6) points the CloudStack apt repository as "deb 
> http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/ubuntu precise 4.9"; however, the latest 
> version available for Ubuntu Precise is 4.8 [2].
> 

The packages were not uploaded there by Jenkins, but afaik it will work on 12.04

4.10 will no longer work due to Java 8. I will copy the 4.9 packages to precise.

Wido

> I think that we should either update the documentation or add the 4.9 
> package repository for the Precise distribution.
> 

> A mail that already reported it before [3].
> 
> Cheers,
> Gabriel.
> 
> [1] 
> http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/projects/cloudstack-release-notes/en/4.9.0/upgrade/upgrade-4.6.html
> [2] http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/ubuntu/dists/precise/
> [3] https://www.mail-archive.com/users@cloudstack.apache.org/msg21175.html

Re: CS Collab Conf Brazil page is down

2017-01-17 Thread Tutkowski, Mike 
Hi,

I am personally OK with the event taking place in March, August, or September 
(i.e. any of the dates you've suggested).

It might be a bit tight for March if the call for participation is not yet open.

Also, I wonder if August might be tough for a bunch of people, though, as they 
may be on vacation.

Let's keep the communication flowing with regards to this event. I know I am 
very eager to attend it and I'm guessing others are, as well.

Thanks!
Mike

> On Jan 17, 2017, at 10:58 AM, Nicolas Vazquez  wrote:
> 
> Hi Marco and all,
> 
> Thanks for answering about this event!
> 
> I would like to mention some things that, from my point of view, could be
> improved by sharing my own experience. First of all, I think there has been
> lack of communication about this event. Personally, I've been looking
> forward to attend this event since last year, and the only official
> announcement was that event has to be rescheduled. As I needed to change
> flight tickets dates, I needed official information about the rescheduled
> event dates and couldn't find it on web page as it's been down or not
> updated. Luckly, I could communicate with Shapeblue people who helped me
> confirming the dates of the event for March so I could reschedule flight
> tickets on time (before September 28th). I think that they had to be
> announced last year so that everybody could be aware of new dates and had
> time to prepare for this CCC and could attend.
> 
> In my opinion, I would like that event will be held on March, but, if you
> think it should have to be rescheduled again, can you please announce it or
> update web page? I know this things require extra time and effort, but I
> think that improving communication we can have a really nice CCC in Latin
> America.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nicolas Vazquez
> 
> 2017-01-17 12:51 GMT-03:00 Marco Sinhoreli :
> 
>> Hi Will and all.
>> 
>> Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
>> 
>> The event day is booked but we have flexibility to change the dates.
>> Professor Rubens Queiroz from Unicamp agrees to change the date to 3rd
>> quarter. He suggested August or September in order to have enough time and
>> to get rid of eventual overlapping with other IT event dates and to prepare
>> our first CCC-BR. Our wish is to have an event with wide community
>> participation and I agree with yours arguments.
>> 
>> The dates they have available on the 3rd quarter are:
>> August 09th - 10th
>> September 18th - 19th
>> 
>> In August there are 3 auditoriums in both days and September 3 auditoriums
>> in 18th and 2 in 19th.
>> 
>> The event will be transmitted online and the videos will be recorded. ASAP
>> we have the website with CFP online, we will communicate to you all.
>> 
>> I want that we all make this decision together as a community. For this
>> reason, please, thoughts and suggestions from all of you are very welcome.
>> 
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Marco Sinhoreli
>> Managing Consultant
>> marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com
>> mobile: +55 21 98276 3636
>> 
>> Praia de Botafogo 501, bloco 1 - sala 101 – Botafogo
>> Rio de Janeiro, RJ - Brazil - CEP 22250-040
>> office: + 55 21 2586 6390 | fax: +55 21 2586 6002
>> http://www.shapeblue.com/ | twitter: @shapeblue
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Em [DATE], "[NAME]" <[ADDRESS]> escreveu:
>> 
>>> Thanks Marco,
>>> So if I understand correctly, you plan to keep the dates of March 20-21
>>> because that is when you have the venue booked.  You are focusing mainly
>> on
>>> local ACS users, but others are obviously welcome assuming they can make
>>> the trip.  I agree that it makes sense to market it as a CCC because that
>>> is how our marketing channels are currently setup and we can give you the
>>> best exposure that way.
>>> 
>>> There will be some contention with dates, but I think that is likely OK.
>> I
>>> think you will be pulling a pretty large local crowd and the ApacheCon
>>> Miami event will likely pull more of the North American crowd with a few
>>> from Europe.
>>> 
>>> Once you have your new website up, send us the IP address and we will get
>>> br.cloudstackcollab.org pointed at it.  I will update the
>>> cloudstackcollab.org website to reflect your new dates and the website
>> once
>>> it is available.
>>> 
>>> Let us know how else we can support your event.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Will
>>> 
>>> *Will STEVENS*
>>> Lead Developer
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Marco Sinhoreli <
>>> marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>> 
 All,
 
 We have tried to get another cloudstack event going but had the problem
 previously with the venue pulling out.
 
 Our initial intention was to do another cloudstack day, like our really
 successful one in 2014. The idea then came to turn it into a more
 international event (aka CCC).
 
 The problem is that the planning cycles in Brasil  are shorter than for

Re: CS Collab Conf Brazil page is down

2017-01-17 Thread Nicolas Vazquez 
Hi Marco and all,

Thanks for answering about this event!

I would like to mention some things that, from my point of view, could be
improved by sharing my own experience. First of all, I think there has been
lack of communication about this event. Personally, I've been looking
forward to attend this event since last year, and the only official
announcement was that event has to be rescheduled. As I needed to change
flight tickets dates, I needed official information about the rescheduled
event dates and couldn't find it on web page as it's been down or not
updated. Luckly, I could communicate with Shapeblue people who helped me
confirming the dates of the event for March so I could reschedule flight
tickets on time (before September 28th). I think that they had to be
announced last year so that everybody could be aware of new dates and had
time to prepare for this CCC and could attend.

In my opinion, I would like that event will be held on March, but, if you
think it should have to be rescheduled again, can you please announce it or
update web page? I know this things require extra time and effort, but I
think that improving communication we can have a really nice CCC in Latin
America.

Thanks,
Nicolas Vazquez

2017-01-17 12:51 GMT-03:00 Marco Sinhoreli :

> Hi Will and all.
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
>
> The event day is booked but we have flexibility to change the dates.
> Professor Rubens Queiroz from Unicamp agrees to change the date to 3rd
> quarter. He suggested August or September in order to have enough time and
> to get rid of eventual overlapping with other IT event dates and to prepare
> our first CCC-BR. Our wish is to have an event with wide community
> participation and I agree with yours arguments.
>
> The dates they have available on the 3rd quarter are:
> August 09th - 10th
> September 18th - 19th
>
> In August there are 3 auditoriums in both days and September 3 auditoriums
> in 18th and 2 in 19th.
>
> The event will be transmitted online and the videos will be recorded. ASAP
> we have the website with CFP online, we will communicate to you all.
>
> I want that we all make this decision together as a community. For this
> reason, please, thoughts and suggestions from all of you are very welcome.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
>
> Marco Sinhoreli
> Managing Consultant
> marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com
> mobile: +55 21 98276 3636
>
> Praia de Botafogo 501, bloco 1 - sala 101 – Botafogo
> Rio de Janeiro, RJ - Brazil - CEP 22250-040
> office: + 55 21 2586 6390 | fax: +55 21 2586 6002
> http://www.shapeblue.com/ | twitter: @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Em [DATE], "[NAME]" <[ADDRESS]> escreveu:
>
> >Thanks Marco,
> >So if I understand correctly, you plan to keep the dates of March 20-21
> >because that is when you have the venue booked.  You are focusing mainly
> on
> >local ACS users, but others are obviously welcome assuming they can make
> >the trip.  I agree that it makes sense to market it as a CCC because that
> >is how our marketing channels are currently setup and we can give you the
> >best exposure that way.
> >
> >There will be some contention with dates, but I think that is likely OK.
> I
> >think you will be pulling a pretty large local crowd and the ApacheCon
> >Miami event will likely pull more of the North American crowd with a few
> >from Europe.
> >
> >Once you have your new website up, send us the IP address and we will get
> >br.cloudstackcollab.org pointed at it.  I will update the
> >cloudstackcollab.org website to reflect your new dates and the website
> once
> >it is available.
> >
> >Let us know how else we can support your event.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Will
> >
> >*Will STEVENS*
> >Lead Developer
> >
> >
> >
> >On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Marco Sinhoreli <
> >marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> >
> >> All,
> >>
> >> We have tried to get another cloudstack event going but had the problem
> >> previously with the venue pulling out.
> >>
> >> Our initial intention was to do another cloudstack day, like our really
> >> successful one in 2014. The idea then came to turn it into a more
> >> international event (aka CCC).
> >>
> >> The problem is that the planning cycles in Brasil  are shorter than for
> >> international events.
> >>
> >> We had over 300 people from our local community at the last one and
> >> hopefully will get similar here.
> >>
> >> We have now had the offer of this venue for these dates. We would still
> >> like to have this event, and everybody in the community is  welcome,
> but it
> >> may be difficult to  "think" of it as a CCC (i.e. we still carry  on
> with
> >> it, but acknowledge that  it may clash with other events and it may be
> >> difficult for international people to attend)
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> Marco Sinhoreli
> >> Managing Consultant
> >> marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com
> >> mobile: +55 21 98276 3636
> >>
> >> Praia de Botafogo 501, bloco 1 - sala 101 –

Re: CS Collab Conf Brazil page is down

2017-01-17 Thread Marco Sinhoreli 
Hi Will and all. 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! 

The event day is booked but we have flexibility to change the dates. Professor 
Rubens Queiroz from Unicamp agrees to change the date to 3rd quarter. He 
suggested August or September in order to have enough time and to get rid of 
eventual overlapping with other IT event dates and to prepare our first CCC-BR. 
Our wish is to have an event with wide community participation and I agree with 
yours arguments.

The dates they have available on the 3rd quarter are:
August 09th - 10th
September 18th - 19th

In August there are 3 auditoriums in both days and September 3 auditoriums in 
18th and 2 in 19th. 

The event will be transmitted online and the videos will be recorded. ASAP we 
have the website with CFP online, we will communicate to you all.

I want that we all make this decision together as a community. For this reason, 
please, thoughts and suggestions from all of you are very welcome.


Best regards,





Marco Sinhoreli
Managing Consultant
marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com
mobile: +55 21 98276 3636
 
Praia de Botafogo 501, bloco 1 - sala 101 – Botafogo
Rio de Janeiro, RJ - Brazil - CEP 22250-040
office: + 55 21 2586 6390 | fax: +55 21 2586 6002
http://www.shapeblue.com/ | twitter: @shapeblue








Em [DATE], "[NAME]" <[ADDRESS]> escreveu:

>Thanks Marco,
>So if I understand correctly, you plan to keep the dates of March 20-21
>because that is when you have the venue booked.  You are focusing mainly on
>local ACS users, but others are obviously welcome assuming they can make
>the trip.  I agree that it makes sense to market it as a CCC because that
>is how our marketing channels are currently setup and we can give you the
>best exposure that way.
>
>There will be some contention with dates, but I think that is likely OK.  I
>think you will be pulling a pretty large local crowd and the ApacheCon
>Miami event will likely pull more of the North American crowd with a few
>from Europe.
>
>Once you have your new website up, send us the IP address and we will get
>br.cloudstackcollab.org pointed at it.  I will update the
>cloudstackcollab.org website to reflect your new dates and the website once
>it is available.
>
>Let us know how else we can support your event.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Will
>
>*Will STEVENS*
>Lead Developer
>
>
>
>On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Marco Sinhoreli <
>marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> We have tried to get another cloudstack event going but had the problem
>> previously with the venue pulling out.
>>
>> Our initial intention was to do another cloudstack day, like our really
>> successful one in 2014. The idea then came to turn it into a more
>> international event (aka CCC).
>>
>> The problem is that the planning cycles in Brasil  are shorter than for
>> international events.
>>
>> We had over 300 people from our local community at the last one and
>> hopefully will get similar here.
>>
>> We have now had the offer of this venue for these dates. We would still
>> like to have this event, and everybody in the community is  welcome, but it
>> may be difficult to  "think" of it as a CCC (i.e. we still carry  on with
>> it, but acknowledge that  it may clash with other events and it may be
>> difficult for international people to attend)
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Marco Sinhoreli
>> Managing Consultant
>> marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com
>> mobile: +55 21 98276 3636
>>
>> Praia de Botafogo 501, bloco 1 - sala 101 – Botafogo
>> Rio de Janeiro, RJ - Brazil - CEP 22250-040
>> office: + 55 21 2586 6390 | fax: +55 21 2586 6002
>> http://www.shapeblue.com/ | twitter: @shapeblue
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Em [DATE], "[NAME]" <[ADDRESS]> escreveu:
>>
>> >I agree with Will. There may not be much time to prepare for if the event
>> is planned for March. I look forward to more details on the event soon.
>> >
>> >
>> >Raj
>> >
>> >
>> >From: williamstev...@gmail.com  on behalf of
>> Will Stevens 
>> >Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 8:02:48 AM
>> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> >Subject: Re: CS Collab Conf Brazil page is down
>> >
>> >Thank for following up Marco,
>> >I am a bit worried about the timing since I think we are looking to try to
>> >make a presence at ApacheCon in Miami on May 16-18.  It may be hard to
>> fill
>> >both events...
>> >
>> >How far have you guys gotten in your planning?  I have not seen anything
>> >recently on the lists regarding things like requesting speakers and such.
>> >Keep in mind that anyone coming from india has to have everything in order
>> >more than a month in advance because it takes over a month to get a visa
>> to
>> >leave the country.  They will also need to know that their talks are
>> >accepted when they apply for a visa, so you have to have your schedule
>> >pretty much ironed out by the first week of Feb to hit those dates.
>> >
>> >Let me know if you have questions...
>> >

Re: CS Collab Conf Brazil page is down

2017-01-17 Thread Marco Sinhoreli 
Hi Will and all. 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! 

The event day is booked but we have flexibility to change the dates. Professor 
Rubens Queiroz from Unicamp agrees to change the date to 3rd quarter. He 
suggested August or September in order to have enough time and to get rid of 
eventual overlapping with other IT event dates and to prepare our first CCC-BR. 
Our wish is to have an event with wide community participation and I agree with 
yours arguments.

The dates they have available on the 3rd quarter are:
August 09th - 10th
September 18th - 19th

In August there are 3 auditoriums in both days and September 3 auditoriums in 
18th and 2 in 19th. 

The event will be transmitted online and the videos will be recorded. ASAP we 
have the website with CFP online, we will communicate to you all.

I want that we all make this decision together as a community. For this reason, 
please, thoughts and suggestions from all of you are very welcome.


Best regards,




Marco Sinhoreli
Managing Consultant
marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com
mobile: +55 21 98276 3636
 
Praia de Botafogo 501, bloco 1 - sala 101 – Botafogo
Rio de Janeiro, RJ - Brazil - CEP 22250-040
office: + 55 21 2586 6390 | fax: +55 21 2586 6002
http://www.shapeblue.com/ | twitter: @shapeblue







Em [DATE], "[NAME]" <[ADDRESS]> escreveu:

>Thanks Marco,
>So if I understand correctly, you plan to keep the dates of March 20-21
>because that is when you have the venue booked.  You are focusing mainly on
>local ACS users, but others are obviously welcome assuming they can make
>the trip.  I agree that it makes sense to market it as a CCC because that
>is how our marketing channels are currently setup and we can give you the
>best exposure that way.
>
>There will be some contention with dates, but I think that is likely OK.  I
>think you will be pulling a pretty large local crowd and the ApacheCon
>Miami event will likely pull more of the North American crowd with a few
>from Europe.
>
>Once you have your new website up, send us the IP address and we will get
>br.cloudstackcollab.org pointed at it.  I will update the
>cloudstackcollab.org website to reflect your new dates and the website once
>it is available.
>
>Let us know how else we can support your event.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Will
>
>*Will STEVENS*
>Lead Developer
>
>
>
>On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Marco Sinhoreli <
>marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> We have tried to get another cloudstack event going but had the problem
>> previously with the venue pulling out.
>>
>> Our initial intention was to do another cloudstack day, like our really
>> successful one in 2014. The idea then came to turn it into a more
>> international event (aka CCC).
>>
>> The problem is that the planning cycles in Brasil  are shorter than for
>> international events.
>>
>> We had over 300 people from our local community at the last one and
>> hopefully will get similar here.
>>
>> We have now had the offer of this venue for these dates. We would still
>> like to have this event, and everybody in the community is  welcome, but it
>> may be difficult to  "think" of it as a CCC (i.e. we still carry  on with
>> it, but acknowledge that  it may clash with other events and it may be
>> difficult for international people to attend)
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Marco Sinhoreli
>> Managing Consultant
>> marco.sinhor...@shapeblue.com
>> mobile: +55 21 98276 3636
>>
>> Praia de Botafogo 501, bloco 1 - sala 101 – Botafogo
>> Rio de Janeiro, RJ - Brazil - CEP 22250-040
>> office: + 55 21 2586 6390 | fax: +55 21 2586 6002
>> http://www.shapeblue.com/ | twitter: @shapeblue
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Em [DATE], "[NAME]" <[ADDRESS]> escreveu:
>>
>> >I agree with Will. There may not be much time to prepare for if the event
>> is planned for March. I look forward to more details on the event soon.
>> >
>> >
>> >Raj
>> >
>> >
>> >From: williamstev...@gmail.com  on behalf of
>> Will Stevens 
>> >Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 8:02:48 AM
>> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> >Subject: Re: CS Collab Conf Brazil page is down
>> >
>> >Thank for following up Marco,
>> >I am a bit worried about the timing since I think we are looking to try to
>> >make a presence at ApacheCon in Miami on May 16-18.  It may be hard to
>> fill
>> >both events...
>> >
>> >How far have you guys gotten in your planning?  I have not seen anything
>> >recently on the lists regarding things like requesting speakers and such.
>> >Keep in mind that anyone coming from india has to have everything in order
>> >more than a month in advance because it takes over a month to get a visa
>> to
>> >leave the country.  They will also need to know that their talks are
>> >accepted when they apply for a visa, so you have to have your schedule
>> >pretty much ironed out by the first week of Feb to hit those dates.
>> >
>> >Let me know if you have questions...
>> >

Re: Dedicated IP range for SSVM/CPVM

2017-01-17 Thread Wei ZHOU 
I agree with Will's suggestion.

-Wei

2017-01-17 6:13 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :

> Rene, this is probably not going to solve your problem, but I use this
> trick for other use cases.  You can setup more than one range.  ACS seems
> to always exhaust one range before moving on to the next range.  If it is a
> new install, then you can do a range with only 2 IPs in it and make it
> first.  Since the first two IPs which will be provisioned when ACS is setup
> is the SSVM and CPVM, they will automatically take the two IPs from that
> special range.
>
> I am pretty sure I have tested this.  Later when other IPs have been used
> from the other range, if you destroy the SSVM or CPVM, they will come back
> up on one of the two IPs that they were on before because they will be free
> again and they will be used first again.  If your system is really active,
> then you will be in a race condition while the SSVM and CPVM get bounced to
> get the same IPs back.
>
> Anyway, I figured I would mention it because it may be a workaround you can
> make use of.  I do this in dev/staging environments which need real public
> IPs, but I don't need the SSVM and CPVM to have real public IPs.  This lets
> me preserve two real public IPs by using private IPs for that first range
> for the SSVM and CPVM.
>
> Cheers,
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> 
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:37 PM, Nitin Kumar Maharana <
> nitinkumar.mahar...@accelerite.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Rene,
> >
> > The default pool, which means are you mentioning the public IP range?
> >
> > If it is a public IP range, user VMs won’t be consuming any IP from
> there.
> > Only system VMs(CPVM/SSVM/VR) will be consuming. VRs will be providing
> > public access to the user VMs.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nitin
> > > On 16-Jan-2017, at 8:56 PM, Rene Moser  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > We would like to make a change proposal for SSVM/CPVM.
> > >
> > > Currently, the SSVM/CPVM get an IP from the "default" pool of
> > > vlaniprange which is the from the account "system"
> > >
> > >
> > >  "vlaniprange": [
> > >{
> > >  "account": "system",
> > >  "domain": "ROOT",
> > >  "endip": "10.101.0.250",
> > >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
> > >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
> > >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
> > >  "startip": "10.101.0.11",
> > >  ...
> > >
> > >},
> > >
> > >
> > >  "systemvm": [
> > >{
> > >  "activeviewersessions": 0,
> > >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
> > >  "hypervisor": "VMware",
> > >  "id": "d9a8abe5-b1e0-47d6-8f39-01b48ff1e0fa",
> > >  "name": "v-5877-VM",
> > >  "privatenetmask": "255.255.255.0",
> > >  "publicip": "10.101.0.113",
> > >  "publicnetmask": "255.255.255.0",
> > >  "state": "Running",
> > >  ...
> > >},
> > >
> > >
> > > For security considerations we would like to define a dedicated IP
> range
> > > for SSVM/CPVM, which, preferably, should not have any relation to the
> > > default pool range.
> > >
> > > The default pool range should be used for userVMs only. To indicate the
> > > use I propolse 2 new flags, which only considered for "account=system"
> > > and indicate if the range can be used for userVMs or/and systemVMs.
> > >
> > > For backwards compatibility this would be the default
> > >
> > > "foruservms": true,
> > > "forsystemvms": true,
> > >
> > >
> > > to have a separate range for UserVMs/SystemVMs, it would look like
> > >
> > >
> > >  "vlaniprange": [
> > >{
> > >  "account": "system",
> > >  "domain": "ROOT",
> > >  "foruservms": true,
> > >  "forsystemvms": false,
> > >  "endip": "192.160.123.250",
> > >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
> > >  "gateway": "192.160.123.1",
> > >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
> > >  "startip": "192.160.123.11",
> > >  ...
> > >
> > >},
> > >
> > >  "vlaniprange": [
> > >{
> > >  "account": "system",
> > >  "domain": "ROOT",
> > >  "foruservms": false,
> > >  "forsystemvms": true,
> > >  "endip": "10.101.0.250",
> > >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
> > >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
> > >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
> > >  "startip": "10.101.0.11",
> > >  ...
> > >
> > >},
> > >
> > >
> > > Does anyone has see any conflicts with this proposal?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > René
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > DISCLAIMER
> > ==
> > This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is
> > the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended
> > only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If
> > you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read,
> retain,
> > copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this
> > communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of
> > this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept
> any

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1909: CLOUDSTACK-9740 : Search for secondary IP of ...

2017-01-17 Thread niteshsarda 
GitHub user niteshsarda opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1909

CLOUDSTACK-9740 : Search for secondary IP of NIC that is attached to …

Search for secondary IP of NIC that is attached to an instance is not 
working.

If instance has more than one secondary IP assigned and administrator 
attempts to search that list, all IPs are displayed instead of being filtered 
by the search string.
in web UI:
CCP dashboard -> Instances ->  -> NICs -> ”View Secondary 
IPs” -> Search for a IP, but the search returns all the IPs in the list

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/niteshsarda/cloudstack CS-9740

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1909.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1909


commit 4b335fec047350d65031ef636d4c9b70b3a7ba98
Author: Nitesh Sarda 
Date:   2017-01-17T11:05:54Z

CLOUDSTACK-9740 : Search for secondary IP of NIC that is attached to an 
instance is not working




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1623: CLOUDSTACK-9317: Enable/disable static NAT associate...

2017-01-17 Thread ProjectMoon 
Github user ProjectMoon commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1623
  
Closed in favor of https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1908


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1623: CLOUDSTACK-9317: Enable/disable static NAT as...

2017-01-17 Thread ProjectMoon 
Github user ProjectMoon closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1623


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1908: CLOUDSTACK-9317: Fixed disable static nat on leaving...

2017-01-17 Thread ProjectMoon 
Github user ProjectMoon commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1908
  
Thanks for adding the missing parts. Here is the PR that was open against 
4.8 for this, which I guess can be closed now: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1623

I guess the comment from @jburwell still applies to this.



---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1450: CLOUDSTACK-9317: Enable/disable static NAT associate...

2017-01-17 Thread jayapalu 
Github user jayapalu commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1450
  
@ProjectMoon 
Added the new PR https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1908 for 
addressing missing issues in this PR


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1908: CLOUDSTACK-9317: Fixed disable static nat on ...

2017-01-17 Thread jayapalu 
GitHub user jayapalu opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1908

CLOUDSTACK-9317: Fixed disable static nat on leaving ips on interface

FIxed issue in disabling multiple static  nat simultaneously.

This patch has taken changes from the PR 1450 and added the missing parts
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1450

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/Accelerite/cloudstack staticnat

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1908.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1908


commit 7e9c436c904dd7e21844aa34177854eda42a82ee
Author: Jayapal 
Date:   2017-01-17T09:50:16Z

CLOUDSTACK-9317: Fixed disable static nat on leaving ips on interface




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

RE: Dedicated IP range for SSVM/CPVM

2017-01-17 Thread Paul Angus 
I have come across a few people with effectively this use case over the years.  
My thoughts have always been that it would good to be able to reserve IPs or 
ranges for SSVM & CPVM in the same way that we can reserve IPs or ranges for an 
account or domain...


Kind regards,

Paul Angus

paul.an...@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
  
 


-Original Message-
From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 17 January 2017 08:27
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dedicated IP range for SSVM/CPVM

Hi Nitin,

There are legit reasons for separating VR public pool from SSVM and CPVM.

For instance if you run a private cloud and don't want to have your cpvm/ssvm 
publically available, but still want to have the VRs accessible

Erik

tir. 17. jan. 2017 kl. 05.37 skrev Nitin Kumar Maharana <
nitinkumar.mahar...@accelerite.com>:

> Hi Rene,
>
>
>
> The default pool, which means are you mentioning the public IP range?
>
>
>
> If it is a public IP range, user VMs won’t be consuming any IP from there.
>
> Only system VMs(CPVM/SSVM/VR) will be consuming. VRs will be providing 
> public access to the user VMs.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nitin
>
> > On 16-Jan-2017, at 8:56 PM, Rene Moser  wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Hi
>
> >
>
> > We would like to make a change proposal for SSVM/CPVM.
>
> >
>
> > Currently, the SSVM/CPVM get an IP from the "default" pool of
>
> > vlaniprange which is the from the account "system"
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  "vlaniprange": [
>
> >{
>
> >  "account": "system",
>
> >  "domain": "ROOT",
>
> >  "endip": "10.101.0.250",
>
> >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
>
> >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
>
> >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "startip": "10.101.0.11",
>
> >  ...
>
> >
>
> >},
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  "systemvm": [
>
> >{
>
> >  "activeviewersessions": 0,
>
> >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
>
> >  "hypervisor": "VMware",
>
> >  "id": "d9a8abe5-b1e0-47d6-8f39-01b48ff1e0fa",
>
> >  "name": "v-5877-VM",
>
> >  "privatenetmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "publicip": "10.101.0.113",
>
> >  "publicnetmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "state": "Running",
>
> >  ...
>
> >},
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > For security considerations we would like to define a dedicated IP 
> > range
>
> > for SSVM/CPVM, which, preferably, should not have any relation to 
> > the
>
> > default pool range.
>
> >
>
> > The default pool range should be used for userVMs only. To indicate 
> > the
>
> > use I propolse 2 new flags, which only considered for "account=system"
>
> > and indicate if the range can be used for userVMs or/and systemVMs.
>
> >
>
> > For backwards compatibility this would be the default
>
> >
>
> > "foruservms": true,
>
> > "forsystemvms": true,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > to have a separate range for UserVMs/SystemVMs, it would look like
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  "vlaniprange": [
>
> >{
>
> >  "account": "system",
>
> >  "domain": "ROOT",
>
> >  "foruservms": true,
>
> >  "forsystemvms": false,
>
> >  "endip": "192.160.123.250",
>
> >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
>
> >  "gateway": "192.160.123.1",
>
> >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "startip": "192.160.123.11",
>
> >  ...
>
> >
>
> >},
>
> >
>
> >  "vlaniprange": [
>
> >{
>
> >  "account": "system",
>
> >  "domain": "ROOT",
>
> >  "foruservms": false,
>
> >  "forsystemvms": true,
>
> >  "endip": "10.101.0.250",
>
> >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
>
> >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
>
> >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "startip": "10.101.0.11",
>
> >  ...
>
> >
>
> >},
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Does anyone has see any conflicts with this proposal?
>
> >
>
> > Regards
>
> > René
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> DISCLAIMER
>
> ==
>
> This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which 
> is the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is 
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is 
> addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not 
> authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this 
> message. If you have received this communication in error, please 
> notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a 
> Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected 
> mails.
>
>

Re: Dedicated IP range for SSVM/CPVM

2017-01-17 Thread Erik Weber 
Hi Nitin,

There are legit reasons for separating VR public pool from SSVM and CPVM.

For instance if you run a private cloud and don't want to have your
cpvm/ssvm publically available, but still want to have the VRs accessible

Erik

tir. 17. jan. 2017 kl. 05.37 skrev Nitin Kumar Maharana <
nitinkumar.mahar...@accelerite.com>:

> Hi Rene,
>
>
>
> The default pool, which means are you mentioning the public IP range?
>
>
>
> If it is a public IP range, user VMs won’t be consuming any IP from there.
>
> Only system VMs(CPVM/SSVM/VR) will be consuming. VRs will be providing
> public access to the user VMs.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nitin
>
> > On 16-Jan-2017, at 8:56 PM, Rene Moser  wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Hi
>
> >
>
> > We would like to make a change proposal for SSVM/CPVM.
>
> >
>
> > Currently, the SSVM/CPVM get an IP from the "default" pool of
>
> > vlaniprange which is the from the account "system"
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  "vlaniprange": [
>
> >{
>
> >  "account": "system",
>
> >  "domain": "ROOT",
>
> >  "endip": "10.101.0.250",
>
> >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
>
> >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
>
> >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "startip": "10.101.0.11",
>
> >  ...
>
> >
>
> >},
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  "systemvm": [
>
> >{
>
> >  "activeviewersessions": 0,
>
> >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
>
> >  "hypervisor": "VMware",
>
> >  "id": "d9a8abe5-b1e0-47d6-8f39-01b48ff1e0fa",
>
> >  "name": "v-5877-VM",
>
> >  "privatenetmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "publicip": "10.101.0.113",
>
> >  "publicnetmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "state": "Running",
>
> >  ...
>
> >},
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > For security considerations we would like to define a dedicated IP range
>
> > for SSVM/CPVM, which, preferably, should not have any relation to the
>
> > default pool range.
>
> >
>
> > The default pool range should be used for userVMs only. To indicate the
>
> > use I propolse 2 new flags, which only considered for "account=system"
>
> > and indicate if the range can be used for userVMs or/and systemVMs.
>
> >
>
> > For backwards compatibility this would be the default
>
> >
>
> > "foruservms": true,
>
> > "forsystemvms": true,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > to have a separate range for UserVMs/SystemVMs, it would look like
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  "vlaniprange": [
>
> >{
>
> >  "account": "system",
>
> >  "domain": "ROOT",
>
> >  "foruservms": true,
>
> >  "forsystemvms": false,
>
> >  "endip": "192.160.123.250",
>
> >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
>
> >  "gateway": "192.160.123.1",
>
> >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "startip": "192.160.123.11",
>
> >  ...
>
> >
>
> >},
>
> >
>
> >  "vlaniprange": [
>
> >{
>
> >  "account": "system",
>
> >  "domain": "ROOT",
>
> >  "foruservms": false,
>
> >  "forsystemvms": true,
>
> >  "endip": "10.101.0.250",
>
> >  "forvirtualnetwork": true,
>
> >  "gateway": "10.101.0.1",
>
> >  "netmask": "255.255.255.0",
>
> >  "startip": "10.101.0.11",
>
> >  ...
>
> >
>
> >},
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Does anyone has see any conflicts with this proposal?
>
> >
>
> > Regards
>
> > René
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> DISCLAIMER
>
> ==
>
> This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is
> the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended
> only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If
> you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain,
> copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this
> communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of
> this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any
> liability for virus infected mails.
>
>