Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack Terraform Provider v0.4.0

[Suresh Anaparti]

+1

Performed some VM and Network operations on KVM in ACS 4.16.0, works fine.

I've noticed same issue as Rohit, first run failed to create firewall rules and 
the management server log indicates that the router is still starting (so need 
to wait a while before applying the firewall rules).


Regards,
Suresh

On 31/01/22, 1:12 PM, "Pearl d'Silva"  wrote:

+1

Did some basic lifecycle operations on a VM, network - such as creation, 
update and destroy, adding secondary IP to a VM.
Performed the operations as an admin and a user.
Did similar operations in a project as a user. Also attempted resetting the 
VMs SSH key.
Encountered a small issue with respect to adding a secondary IP to a NIC 
for a VM deployed in a project, but I wouldn't categorize it as a blocker and 
can be addressed in the next release.


Thanks,
Pearl


From: Daan Hoogland 
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2022 9:29 PM
To: dev 
Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack Terraform Provider v0.4.0

+1 (binding)

performed similar tests as Rohit but in a dual zone and with a vpc in one
of the zones. Two different configurations one with one zone and one with
both. destroy went fine ;) in the vpc firewall rules would not create. I am
not sure this is a known issue, but the error message is clear, so I'm not
calling it a bug:

"Unable to create firewall rule for the IP address ID=204 as IP is not
associated with any network and no networkId is passed in"

The only weird thing is that the network is not an allowed parameter.


On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 9:55 AM Rohit Yadav 
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> I checked the source tarball checksum and gpg signature, and using the RC1
> build was able to test a simple VM deployment in a zone in an isolated
> network with some firewall rules applied, against a KVM based ACS 4.16.0.0
> env.
>
> (note: in my testing, in the first run the firewall application met with
> some failure but on second try of terraform apply it worked, see run log
> below)
>
> Source tarball verification:
> gpg: Signature made Wed Jan 19 15:33:18 2022 IST
> gpg:using RSA key 1031D6946F8A7C4B0C3E9EEFAEA5313845ADC482
> gpg: Good signature from "Harikrishna Patnala (github gpg) <
> harikrishna.patn...@gmail.com>" [unknown]
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg:  There is no indication that the signature belongs to the
> owner.
> Primary key fingerprint: 1031 D694 6F8A 7C4B 0C3E  9EEF AEA5 3138 45AD 
C482
>
> Run log for reference:
>
> # terraform apply
>
> Terraform used the selected providers to generate the following execution
> plan. Resource actions are indicated with the
> following symbols:
>   + create
>
> Terraform will perform the following actions:
>
>   # cloudstack_egress_firewall.default will be created
>   + resource "cloudstack_egress_firewall" "default" {
>   + id  = (known after apply)
>   + managed = false
>   + network_id  = (known after apply)
>   + parallelism = 2
>
>   + rule {
>   + cidr_list = [
>   + "10.200.0.0/24",
> ]
>   + icmp_code = (known after apply)
>   + icmp_type = (known after apply)
>   + ports = [
>   + "21",
>   + "22",
>   + "443",
>   + "80",
> ]
>   + protocol  = "tcp"
>   + uuids = (known after apply)
> }
> }
>
>   # cloudstack_firewall.default will be created
>   + resource "cloudstack_firewall" "default" {
>   + id= (known after apply)
>   + ip_address_id = (known after apply)
>   + managed   = false
>   + parallelism   = 2
>
>   + rule {
>   + cidr_list = [
>   + "0.0.0.0/0",
> ]
>   + icmp_code = (known after apply)
>   + icmp_type = (known after apply)
>   + ports = [
>   + "22",
>   + "443",
>   + "80",
> ]
>   + protocol  = "tcp"
>   + uuids = (known after apply)
> }
> }
>
>   # cloudstack_instance.web will be created
>   + resource "cloudstack_instance" "web" {
>   + display_name = "VM1Test"
>   + expunge  = true
>   + group= (known after apply)
>   + id   = (known after apply)
>   + ip_address   = (known after apply)
>   + name = "VM1Test"
>   + network_id   = (known after apply)
>

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] DaanHoogland commented on a change in pull request #262: ipv6: support for isolated nw, vpc tiers

[GitBox]

DaanHoogland commented on a change in pull request #262:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/262#discussion_r796313733



##
File path: source/plugins/ipv6.rst
##
@@ -199,3 +202,83 @@ each of the VMs. Use DUID-LL to set up dhclient.
  iface eth0 inet6 dhcp
  autoconf 0
  accept_ra 1
+
+
+Isolated network and VPC tier
+-
+
+.. note::
+   The IPv6 support for isolated networks and VPC tiers is available from 
version 4.17.0.
+
+Guest VMs in an isolated network or VPC tier can obtain both IPv4 and IPv6 IP 
addresses by using a supported network offering and appropriate configurations 
for IPv6 support by the administrator.
+Both VR for such networks and the guest VMs using these networks obtain a 
SLAAC based IPv6 address. While VR is assigned an IPv6 address from the public 
IPv6 range, guest VMs get their IPv6 addresses from the IPv6 subnet assinged to 
the network.
+
+Here's the sequence of events when IPv6 is used:
+
+#. The administrator adds a public IPv6 range in an advanced zone.
+
+#. The administrator adds an IPv6 prefix for guest traffic type for the zone.
+
+#. The administrator creates a network offering with IPv4 + IPv6 (Dual stack) 
support.
+
+#. The user deploys an isolated network or a VPC tier with above network 
offering.
+
+#. CloudStack assigns a SLAAC based public IPv6 address to the network from 
the public IPv6 range of the zone. It also assigns an IPv6 subnet to the 
network from the guest IPv6 prefix for the zone. See `SLAAC 
`__\ for more information.
+
+#. The user deploys a guest VM in the network. The VM is assigned a SLAAC 
based IPv6 address from the guest IPv6 subnet of the network.
+
+
+Prerequisites and Guidelines
+
+
+Consider the following:
+
+-  CIDR size for the public IPv6 range for a zone must be 64.
+
+-  CIDR size for the guest IPv6 prefix for the zone must be lesser than 64. 
Each guest network is assigned a subnet from this prefix with CIDR size 64 
therefore only as many IPv6 supporting guest networks can be deployed from the 
guest prefix as the number of subnets with CIDR size 64.
+
+-  Currently, a guest network cannot be IPv6 only and it can only be either 
IPv4 only or Dual Stack (both IPv4 + IPv6).
+
+-  Once a public IPv6 address and guest subnet are assigned to the network or 
the network is successfully, the operator must update routing in the upstream 
router. For this, CloudStack returns the gateway and subnet for the network 
with listNetworks API response.
+
+
+Adding a Public IPv6 Range
+##
+
+The administrator can use both UI and API to add a public IPv6 range. UI is 
the preferable option.
+Option to add a new public Ipv6 range in the UI can be found in Infrastructure 
-> Zones -> Zone details -> Physical Network tab -> Physical network details -> 
Traffic Types tab -> Public -> *Add IP range*.
+In the Add IP range form, IPv6 can be selected as the IP Range Type. IPv6 
Gateway and CIDR must be provided and optionally a VLAN/VNI can be provided.
+
+Alternatively, ``createVlanIpRange`` API can be used to add a new public IPv6 
range.
+
+|add-public-ipv6-range-form.png|
+
+
+
+Adding Guest IPv6 Prefix
+
+
+Again, both UI and API to add a guest IPv6 prefix. UI is the preferable option.
+Option to add a new public Ipv6 range in the UI can be found in Infrastructure 
-> Zones -> Zone details -> Physical Network tab -> Physical network details -> 
Traffic Types tab -> Guest -> *Add IPv6 prefix*.
+In the Add IPv6 prefix form, an IPv6 prefix with CIDR size lesser than 64 must 
be provided.
+
+Alternatively, ``createGuestNetworkIpv6Prefix`` API can be used to add a new 
guest IPv6 prefix.
+
+|add-guest-ipv6-prefix-form.png|
+
+
+Adding Network Offering with IPv6 Support
+#
+
+With 4.17.0, a new paramter - ``internetprotocol`` has been added to the 
``createNetworkOffering`` API which can be used to create a network offering 
with IPv6 support by using the value dualstack.
+Corresponding option has also been provided in the UI form creating network 
offering:
+
+|dd-ipv6-network-offering-form.png|
+
+
+.. |add-guest-ipv6-prefix-form.png| image:: 
/_static/images/cadd-guest-ipv6-prefix-form.png
+   :alt: Add Guest IPv6 Prefix form.
+.. |add-public-ipv6-range-form.png| image:: 
/_static/images/add-public-ipv6-range-form.png
+   :alt: Add Public IPv6 Range form.
+.. |add-ipv6-network-offering-form.png| image:: 
/_static/images/dd-ipv6-network-offering-form.png
+   :alt: Add IPv6 supported Network Offering form.

Review comment:
   some typos/c&p errors here. only one pic shows in the page.




-- 
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: dev-unsubscr...@clouds

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] blueorangutan commented on pull request #262: ipv6: support for isolated nw, vpc tiers

[GitBox]

blueorangutan commented on pull request #262:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/262#issuecomment-1026491787


   Doc build preview: http://qa.cloudstack.cloud/docs/WIP-PROOFING/pr/262. 
(SL-JID 184)


-- 
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: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] blueorangutan commented on pull request #262: ipv6: support for isolated nw, vpc tiers

[GitBox]

blueorangutan commented on pull request #262:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/262#issuecomment-1026491404


   @shwstppr a Jenkins job has been kicked to build the document. I'll keep you 
posted as I make progress.


-- 
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: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] shwstppr commented on pull request #262: ipv6: support for isolated nw, vpc tiers

[GitBox]

shwstppr commented on pull request #262:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/262#issuecomment-1026490926


   @blueorangutan docbuild


-- 
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: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] shwstppr opened a new pull request #262: ipv6: support for isolated nw, vpc tiers

[GitBox]

shwstppr opened a new pull request #262:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/262


   Feature PR: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/5786


-- 
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: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSE] RM for 4.17

[Gabriel Beims Bräscher]

Sounds good.
Thaks, Nicolas.

On Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 19:42 Rohit Yadav  wrote:

> Sounds good to me, thanks for volunteering Nicolas.
>
>
> Regards.
>
> 
> From: Boris Stoyanov 
> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 13:58
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org ;
> us...@cloudstack.apache.org 
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] RM for 4.17
>
> +1, I can help with triage/testing and any other business Nicolas, let me
> know if you need any additional hands.
>
> Bobby.
>
> From: Ivet Petrova 
> Date: Friday, 28 January 2022, 16:11
> To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org 
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] RM for 4.17
> Nicolas,
> Just to mention you did a great job last time!
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 28 Jan 2022, at 16:05, Nicolas Vazquez  > wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> I would like to put myself forward as the release manager for 4.17.0.0.
>
> I propose we have a window of at least 6 weeks to allow the community and
> users to test and report issues, I will propose the timeline details soon.
>
> I hope to have your support. Please let me know if you have any thoughts /
> comments.
>
> Regards,
> Nicolas Vazquez
>
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack Terraform Provider v0.4.0

[Boris Stoyanov]

+1 (binding)

I’m basing my vote on Vladi’s testing because I did not had a chance to look at 
it.

From: Vladimir Petrov 
Date: Monday, 31 January 2022, 18:34
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org , 
dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack Terraform Provider v0.4.0
+1

I tested all resources (create/modify/destroy operations) on KVM, XCPNG 8.2 and 
VMWare 6.7u3 and ACS versions 4.14. 4.15 and 4.16. I think it's working pretty 
fine and it will be a great milestone in the ACS - Terraform integration.

Best wishes,
Vladimir



Harikrishna Patnala wrote:


Hi All,


I've created a v0.4.0 release of CloudStack Terraform Provider, with the 
following
artifacts up for a vote:


Link to the latest CloudStack Terraform Provider artifact with version 
"0.4.0-RC1": 
https://registry.terraform.io/providers/cloudstack/cloudstack/0.4.0-RC1


Git Branch and commit SHA:
https://github.com/cloudstack/terraform-provider-cloudstack/commit/9496d6a0d029a808dd8876c9119703d6b3bf8c9c


Commit:
9496d6a0d029a808dd8876c9119703d6b3bf8c9c


GitHub pre-release (for RC1 testing, contains changelog,
artifacts/binaries to test, checksums/usage details):
https://github.com/cloudstack/terraform-provider-cloudstack/releases/tag/v0.4.0-RC1


Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same location):
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/terraform-provider-0.4.0-RC1/


PGP release keys (signed using 1031D6946F8A7C4B0C3E9EEFAEA5313845ADC482)
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS



The vote will be open until January 31st, 2022.


For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and the reason why)


Regards,
Harikrishna






 

Re: [PROPOSE] RM for 4.17

[Rohit Yadav]

Sounds good to me, thanks for volunteering Nicolas.


Regards.


From: Boris Stoyanov 
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 13:58
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org ; 
us...@cloudstack.apache.org 
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] RM for 4.17

+1, I can help with triage/testing and any other business Nicolas, let me know 
if you need any additional hands.

Bobby.

From: Ivet Petrova 
Date: Friday, 28 January 2022, 16:11
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org 
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] RM for 4.17
Nicolas,
Just to mention you did a great job last time!

Kind regards,








 

On 28 Jan 2022, at 16:05, Nicolas Vazquez 
mailto:nicolas.vazq...@shapeblue.com>> wrote:

Dear All,

I would like to put myself forward as the release manager for 4.17.0.0.

I propose we have a window of at least 6 weeks to allow the community and users 
to test and report issues, I will propose the timeline details soon.

I hope to have your support. Please let me know if you have any thoughts / 
comments.

Regards,
Nicolas Vazquez

Not able to autoscale kubernetes cluster

[Rishabh Rapatwar]

Hi all,

I am trying to autoscale kubernetes cluster, but it's not working.
Following are the logs of cluster-autoscaler pod in kube-system:

I0131 17:01:11.537869   1 client.go:175] NewAPIRequest response status
code:200
I0131 17:01:11.538288   1 cloudstack_manager.go:88] Got cluster :
&{c6496415-daea-4051-993a-3b9f9c58242e voyager 1 3 2
 1 [0xc000e889f0 0xc000e88a20 0xc000e88a50]}
E0131 17:01:11.538366   1 static_autoscaler.go:271] Failed to get node
infos for groups: Unable to find node voyager-c
ontrol-17ea9f68878 in cluster
I0131 17:01:21.538749   1 static_autoscaler.go:229] Starting main loop

ACS version used is 4.16, and kubernetes version is 1.22.2

Can anyone please help here?


Thankyou,
Rishabh

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack Terraform Provider v0.4.0

[Vladimir Petrov]

+1

I tested all resources (create/modify/destroy operations) on KVM, XCPNG 8.2 and 
VMWare 6.7u3 and ACS versions 4.14. 4.15 and 4.16. I think it's working pretty 
fine and it will be a great milestone in the ACS - Terraform integration.

Best wishes,
Vladimir



Harikrishna Patnala wrote:


Hi All,


I've created a v0.4.0 release of CloudStack Terraform Provider, with the 
following
artifacts up for a vote:


Link to the latest CloudStack Terraform Provider artifact with version 
"0.4.0-RC1": 
https://registry.terraform.io/providers/cloudstack/cloudstack/0.4.0-RC1


Git Branch and commit SHA:
https://github.com/cloudstack/terraform-provider-cloudstack/commit/9496d6a0d029a808dd8876c9119703d6b3bf8c9c


Commit:
9496d6a0d029a808dd8876c9119703d6b3bf8c9c


GitHub pre-release (for RC1 testing, contains changelog,
artifacts/binaries to test, checksums/usage details):
https://github.com/cloudstack/terraform-provider-cloudstack/releases/tag/v0.4.0-RC1


Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same location):
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/terraform-provider-0.4.0-RC1/


PGP release keys (signed using 1031D6946F8A7C4B0C3E9EEFAEA5313845ADC482)
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS



The vote will be open until January 31st, 2022.


For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and the reason why)


Regards,
Harikrishna




 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack Terraform Provider v0.4.0

[Harikrishna Patnala]

Thanks for all testing and votes.

May I request a few more PMC members to test and vote here, we have 2 binding 
votes till now.

Regards,
Harikrishna

From: Pearl d'Silva 
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 1:11 PM
To: dev 
Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack Terraform Provider v0.4.0

+1

Did some basic lifecycle operations on a VM, network - such as creation, update 
and destroy, adding secondary IP to a VM.
Performed the operations as an admin and a user.
Did similar operations in a project as a user. Also attempted resetting the VMs 
SSH key.
Encountered a small issue with respect to adding a secondary IP to a NIC for a 
VM deployed in a project, but I wouldn't categorize it as a blocker and can be 
addressed in the next release.


Thanks,
Pearl


From: Daan Hoogland 
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2022 9:29 PM
To: dev 
Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack Terraform Provider v0.4.0

+1 (binding)

performed similar tests as Rohit but in a dual zone and with a vpc in one
of the zones. Two different configurations one with one zone and one with
both. destroy went fine ;) in the vpc firewall rules would not create. I am
not sure this is a known issue, but the error message is clear, so I'm not
calling it a bug:

"Unable to create firewall rule for the IP address ID=204 as IP is not
associated with any network and no networkId is passed in"

The only weird thing is that the network is not an allowed parameter.


On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 9:55 AM Rohit Yadav 
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> I checked the source tarball checksum and gpg signature, and using the RC1
> build was able to test a simple VM deployment in a zone in an isolated
> network with some firewall rules applied, against a KVM based ACS 4.16.0.0
> env.
>
> (note: in my testing, in the first run the firewall application met with
> some failure but on second try of terraform apply it worked, see run log
> below)
>
> Source tarball verification:
> gpg: Signature made Wed Jan 19 15:33:18 2022 IST
> gpg:using RSA key 1031D6946F8A7C4B0C3E9EEFAEA5313845ADC482
> gpg: Good signature from "Harikrishna Patnala (github gpg) <
> harikrishna.patn...@gmail.com>" [unknown]
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg:  There is no indication that the signature belongs to the
> owner.
> Primary key fingerprint: 1031 D694 6F8A 7C4B 0C3E  9EEF AEA5 3138 45AD C482
>
> Run log for reference:
>
> # terraform apply
>
> Terraform used the selected providers to generate the following execution
> plan. Resource actions are indicated with the
> following symbols:
>   + create
>
> Terraform will perform the following actions:
>
>   # cloudstack_egress_firewall.default will be created
>   + resource "cloudstack_egress_firewall" "default" {
>   + id  = (known after apply)
>   + managed = false
>   + network_id  = (known after apply)
>   + parallelism = 2
>
>   + rule {
>   + cidr_list = [
>   + "10.200.0.0/24",
> ]
>   + icmp_code = (known after apply)
>   + icmp_type = (known after apply)
>   + ports = [
>   + "21",
>   + "22",
>   + "443",
>   + "80",
> ]
>   + protocol  = "tcp"
>   + uuids = (known after apply)
> }
> }
>
>   # cloudstack_firewall.default will be created
>   + resource "cloudstack_firewall" "default" {
>   + id= (known after apply)
>   + ip_address_id = (known after apply)
>   + managed   = false
>   + parallelism   = 2
>
>   + rule {
>   + cidr_list = [
>   + "0.0.0.0/0",
> ]
>   + icmp_code = (known after apply)
>   + icmp_type = (known after apply)
>   + ports = [
>   + "22",
>   + "443",
>   + "80",
> ]
>   + protocol  = "tcp"
>   + uuids = (known after apply)
> }
> }
>
>   # cloudstack_instance.web will be created
>   + resource "cloudstack_instance" "web" {
>   + display_name = "VM1Test"
>   + expunge  = true
>   + group= (known after apply)
>   + id   = (known after apply)
>   + ip_address   = (known after apply)
>   + name = "VM1Test"
>   + network_id   = (known after apply)
>   + project  = (known after apply)
>   + root_disk_size   = (known after apply)
>   + service_offering = "688de728-5d70-42b5-9913-someID"
>   + start_vm = true
>   + tags = (known after apply)
>   + template = "someID-1d5b-4335-a9e7-someID"
>   + zone = "someID-cf47-4b0b-8cf0-someID"
> }
>
>   # cloudstack_ipaddress.newIP1 will be created
>   + resource "cloudstack_ipaddress

[GitHub] [cloudstack-terraform-provider] Pearl1594 edited a comment on issue #31: Failure to add secondary IP to a NIC for a VM in a project

[GitBox]

Pearl1594 edited a comment on issue #31:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-terraform-provider/issues/31#issuecomment-1025625833


   @DaanHoogland I was able to do it directly on ACS, so I believe it's a 
limitation on the provider end - only when the scope is within a project. The 
issue I believe is that we do not have support for providing project as an 
input.


-- 
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: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [cloudstack-terraform-provider] Pearl1594 commented on issue #31: Failure to add secondary IP to a NIC for a VM in a project

[GitBox]

Pearl1594 commented on issue #31:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-terraform-provider/issues/31#issuecomment-1025625833


   I was able to do it directly on ACS, so I believe it's a limitation on the 
provider end - only when the scope is within a project. The issue I believe is 
that we do not have support for providing project as an input.


-- 
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: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [cloudstack-terraform-provider] DaanHoogland commented on issue #31: Failure to add secondary IP to a NIC for a VM in a project

[GitBox]

DaanHoogland commented on issue #31:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-terraform-provider/issues/31#issuecomment-1025620436


   @Pearl1594 is this a cloudstack issue? I.E. does the API allow the action 
that the tf provider can't?


-- 
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: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSE] RM for 4.17

[Boris Stoyanov]

+1, I can help with triage/testing and any other business Nicolas, let me know 
if you need any additional hands.

Bobby.

From: Ivet Petrova 
Date: Friday, 28 January 2022, 16:11
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org 
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [PROPOSE] RM for 4.17
Nicolas,
Just to mention you did a great job last time!

Kind regards,





 

On 28 Jan 2022, at 16:05, Nicolas Vazquez 
mailto:nicolas.vazq...@shapeblue.com>> wrote:

Dear All,

I would like to put myself forward as the release manager for 4.17.0.0.

I propose we have a window of at least 6 weeks to allow the community and users 
to test and report issues, I will propose the timeline details soon.

I hope to have your support. Please let me know if you have any thoughts / 
comments.

Regards,
Nicolas Vazquez