, June 12, 2015 10:27 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: Third party VR / L2 support
Agree to what Funs mentioned. The current network service model is flexible,
there is option to select a provider for a given service by means of network
offering.
About using 3rd party VR, there are 2
[mailto:koushik@citrix.com]
Sent: 12 June 2015 05:57
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: Third party VR / L2 support
Agree to what Funs mentioned. The current network service model is flexible,
there is option to select a provider for a given service by means of network
offering.
About using
of appliances needs to be registered
from CS and used.
-Koushik
-Original Message-
From: Funs Kessen [mailto:fozzielumpk...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Funs
Kessen
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 3:26 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Third party VR / L2 support
Hi Christian and Paul,
I
Subject: Re: Third party VR / L2 support
Hi Christian and Paul,
I agree that the VR/VPC construct could do with some improvements, the
biggest being that it should actually be api driven and allow for more
flexible networking/services combined with scale out itself (we’re looking
[mailto:fozzielumpk...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Funs
Kessen
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 3:26 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Third party VR / L2 support
Hi Christian and Paul,
I agree that the VR/VPC construct could do with some improvements, the
biggest being
, June 12, 2015 1:06 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Third party VR / L2 support
Hi Paul,
We don’t disagree at all, and I think Koushik doesn’t either, we’re just
talking about different things. Today there are limited options but there are
ways to work with these options without
, then a pre-created pool of
appliances needs to be registered from CS and used.
-Koushik
-Original Message-
From: Funs Kessen [mailto:fozzielumpk...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Funs Kessen
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 3:26 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Third party VR / L2
Cloudrouter seems to be GPL2-ish.
--
Erik
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Keerthiraja SJ sjkeer...@gmail.com wrote:
Below are the router we can choose for the cloudstack integration.
https://cloudrouter.org/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/rcp100/?source=directory
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015
Below are the router we can choose for the cloudstack integration.
https://cloudrouter.org/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/rcp100/?source=directory
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Paul Angus paul.an...@shapeblue.com wrote:
Hi Christian,
This is a feature put forward by myself. As a
Hi Christian and Paul,
I agree that the VR/VPC construct could do with some improvements, the biggest
being that it should actually be api driven and allow for more flexible
networking/services combined with scale out itself (we’re looking into this
actually). All of these things bring along
Hi Christian,
This is a feature put forward by myself. As a non-developer I can come up with
these things and throw them over the wall to the developers and pretend I don't
know how complicated it is :)
In summary, it requires a few other pieces of the roadmap to be in place. The
high level
11 matches
Mail list logo