Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-28 Thread Matthew Smart
ty Godsey Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR So based upon this discussion would it be prudent to wait on VyOS 2.0? The current VR is giving us issues but would the time invested in another "solution" be wast

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-28 Thread Will Stevens
;>> On 16/09/16, 11:59 PM, "Simon Weller" wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think our other option is to take a real look at what it would take >>>>>> >>>>> to fix the VR. In my opinion, a lot of the problems are related to the >>>

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-27 Thread Marty Godsey
PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Will, I think that would be very helpful to me at least and for posterity for sure. I am in the process of rolling out my first production deployment of Cloudstack so I have been busier than expected (plus I have been jumping back and fort

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-27 Thread Matthew Smart
would be much easier to maintain. - Si From: Marty Godsey Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR So based upon this discussion would it be prudent to wait on VyOS 2.0? The current VR is giving us issues but woul

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-26 Thread Will Stevens
of time separating out code into distinct > modules, everything would behave a lot better. > >>> > >>> > >>> The pain and suffering is due to years and years of patches and > constant shelling out to complete tasks in my opinion. If we spend time to > reth

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-22 Thread Murali Reddy
;> The pain and suffering is due to years and years of patches and constant >>> shelling out to complete tasks in my opinion. If we spend time to rethink >>> how we interact with the VR in general and we abstract the systems and >>> networking stuff and use well known a

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-22 Thread Will Stevens
Original Message- > From: Matthew Smart [mailto:msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 2:35 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > Thanks Will. That is the answer I expected tbh. But it never hurts to ask! >

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-22 Thread Marty Godsey
com] Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 2:35 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Thanks Will. That is the answer I expected tbh. But it never hurts to ask! Matthew Smart President Smart Software Solutions Inc. 108 S Pierre St. Pierre, SD 57501 Phone: (605) 280-

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-22 Thread Matthew Smart
uch easier to maintain. - Si From: Marty Godsey Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR So based upon this discussion would it be prudent to wait on VyOS 2.0? The current VR is giving us issues but would the time invested i

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-22 Thread Will Stevens
t;>> >>> >>> The pain and suffering is due to years and years of patches and constant >>> shelling out to complete tasks in my opinion. If we spend time to rethink >>> how we interact with the VR in general and we abstract the systems and >>> networ

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-22 Thread Matthew Smart
ems and networking stuff and use well known and stable libraries to do the work, the VR would be much easier to maintain. - Si From: Marty Godsey Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing t

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-20 Thread Will Stevens
blished libraries to complete tasks and instead shell out and run >> commands that are both hard to track and hard to parse on return. >> > >> > >> >If we daemonized this, used a real api for Agent to VR communication, >> used common already existing libraries

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-20 Thread Pierre-Luc Dion
uld be much easier to maintain. > > > > > >- Si > > > > > > > > > > > >From: Marty Godsey > >Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM > >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > >Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Repl

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-20 Thread Will Stevens
return. >> > >> > >> >If we daemonized this, used a real api for Agent to VR communication, >> used common already existing libraries for the system service and network >> interactions and spent a bit of time separating out code into distinct >&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-20 Thread Will Stevens
l and we abstract the systems and > networking stuff and use well known and stable libraries to do the work, > the VR would be much easier to maintain. > > > > > >- Si > > > > > > > > > > > >From: Marty Godse

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-20 Thread Murali Reddy
networking >stuff and use well known and stable libraries to do the work, the VR would be >much easier to maintain. > > >- Si > > > > > >From: Marty Godsey >Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-19 Thread Matthew Smart
regards, Paul Angus paul.an...@shapeblue.com www.shapeblue.com 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue -Original Message- From: Syed Ahmed [mailto:sah...@cloudops.com] Sent: 19 September 2016 17:07 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] R

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-19 Thread Paul Angus
don WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue -Original Message- From: Syed Ahmed [mailto:sah...@cloudops.com] Sent: 19 September 2016 17:07 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Hey Guys, Will and I had a discussion in the morning on around VyOS and I have an idea that coul

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-19 Thread Syed Ahmed
tephan > > > Am Sonntag, den 18.09.2016, 15:19 + schrieb Marty Godsey: > > On this note I also mentioned pfsense earlier. > > > > www.pfsense.org > > > > > > Regards, > > Marty Godsey > > > > -Original Message----- > > From

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-19 Thread Stephan Seitz
too often recently, which is > > > > > why we  > > > > > have started looking into alternative implementations. > > > > > > > > > > One of the things that is nice about potentially using the > > > > > VyOS is

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-19 Thread Will Stevens
on return. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If we daemonized this, used a real api for Agent to VR communication, >>>>> >>>> used >>> >>>> common already existing libraries for the system service and network >>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-19 Thread Matthew Smart
mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Will Stevens Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 10:31 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: dan...@baturin.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR I just had a quick chat with a couple of the guys over on the VyOS chat. I have CC'ed one of them in

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-18 Thread Will Stevens
gt; rethink > >> how we interact with the VR in general and we abstract the systems and > >> networking stuff and use well known and stable libraries to do the work, > >> the VR would be much easier to maintain. > >> > >> > >> - Si > >> &g

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-18 Thread Marty Godsey
On this note I also mentioned pfsense earlier. www.pfsense.org Regards, Marty Godsey -Original Message- From: ilya [mailto:ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 1:09 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Our options become

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-17 Thread ilya
emented and right as that time happened >> to be when VyOS 2.0 is released. Of course you said they are just in the >> scoping range so this could still be a year or more out. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Regards, >> Marty Godsey >> nSource Solutions >> >> -O

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Will Stevens
; Thoughts? > > Regards, > Marty Godsey > nSource Solutions > > -Original Message- > From: williamstev...@gmail.com [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] On > Behalf Of Will Stevens > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 10:31 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc:

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Will Stevens
tember 16, 2016 10:31 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: dan...@baturin.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > I just had a quick chat with a couple of the guys over on the VyOS chat. > I have CC'ed one of them in case we have more licensing questi

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Simon Weller
t the systems and networking stuff and use well known and stable libraries to do the work, the VR would be much easier to maintain. - Si From: Marty Godsey Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing t

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Marty Godsey
ll Stevens Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 10:31 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: dan...@baturin.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR I just had a quick chat with a couple of the guys over on the VyOS chat. I have CC'ed one of them in case we have more licensing questions. So her

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Will Stevens
or DNS/USERDATA/etc, unless we can make VyOS serve > those > > > too. Imho this adds complexity we should void. > > > > > > -- > > > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > > > > > Nux! > > > www.nux.ro &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Syed Ahmed
ke VyOS serve those > > too. Imho this adds complexity we should void. > > > > -- > > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > > > Nux! > > www.nux.ro > > > > ----- Original Message - > > > From: "Will Stevens&

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Will Stevens
logy! > > Nux! > www.nux.ro > > - Original Message - > > From: "Will Stevens" > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Sent: Thursday, 15 September, 2016 17:21:28 > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > > Ya, we would need to add a

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Will Stevens
#creating-new-component > >> > >> <https://opensnaproute.github.io/docs/developer.html# > >> creating-new-component> > >> > >> > >> They've definitely build it with a microservices architecture in mind, > so > >> each indivi

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-16 Thread Nux!
pache.org > Sent: Thursday, 15 September, 2016 17:21:28 > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > Ya, we would need to add a daemon for VPN as well. Load balancing is > another aspect which we will need to consider if we went this route. > Something like https://traefik.io/ could p

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-15 Thread ilya
PLS based L3VPN, EVPN, VPLS in the future. This will be huge >>> for our carrier community that rely on these technologies to do private >>> gateway and inter-VPC interconnections today. We handle this stuff on our >>> ASRs right now with a vlan interconnect into the VR. B

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-15 Thread Will Stevens
components if we really had to. > > > - Si > > > > From: williamstev...@gmail.com on behalf of > Will Stevens > Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:17 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR >

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-15 Thread Simon Weller
rd server and the userdata components if we really had to. - Si From: williamstev...@gmail.com on behalf of Will Stevens Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:17 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR A big part of why I know

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-15 Thread Will Stevens
o the VR would be awesome. > > > It also seems to be written in GO (a language here at ENA we know very > well). > > > - Si > > > > > From: Will Stevens > Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 7:06 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.or

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-15 Thread Simon Weller
er 15, 2016 7:06 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Ya. I don't think it covers our whole use case, but what it does cover is all api driven... On Sep 15, 2016 1:48 AM, "Marty Godsey" wrote: > Though I don’t see VPN in Snaproute.. Makes

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-15 Thread Will Stevens
will force users to > >> > have to maintain > >> and > >> > use containers and adds complexity to the networking aspects of ACS. > >> > Complexity decreases stability. Now I understand the argument that > >> > a monolithic approach also brings its own se

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-14 Thread Marty Godsey
Behalf Of Will Stevens Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 11:06 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Or we could go completely crazy and go with something like FlexSwitch from SnapRoute - http://www.snaproute.com/ - https://opensnaproute.github.io/docs/apis.html

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-14 Thread Marty Godsey
Wednesday, September 14, 2016 11:06 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Or we could go completely crazy and go with something like FlexSwitch from SnapRoute - http://www.snaproute.com/ - https://opensnaproute.github.io/docs/apis.html *Will STEVENS* Lead

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-14 Thread Will Stevens
plifies it. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Marty Godsey >> > nSource Solutions >> > >> > -Original Message- >> > From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chirade...@gmail.com] >> > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 5:37 PM >> &

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-14 Thread Will Stevens
set of issues but it also > > simplifies it. > > > > Regards, > > Marty Godsey > > nSource Solutions > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chirade...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 5:37 PM > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-14 Thread Syed Ahmed
Wednesday, September 14, 2016 5:37 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > I rather doubt that the Cloudrouter will fit the needs of the CloudStack > project > - it is AGPL licensed. Many enterprises will not touch anything that has > AGPL >

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-14 Thread Marty Godsey
> Marty Godsey > nSource Solutions > > -Original Message- > From: Abhinandan Prateek [mailto:abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 2:26 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > Cloudrouter lo

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-14 Thread Chiradeep Vittal
ource Solutions > > -Original Message- > From: Abhinandan Prateek [mailto:abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 2:26 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > Cloudrouter looks promising. These

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-14 Thread Marty Godsey
...@shapeblue.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 2:26 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Cloudrouter looks promising. These have potential to save future engineering effort for example on ipv6 routing, OSPF etc. And the best part is they come with test automation

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Abhinandan Prateek
Cloudrouter looks promising. These have potential to save future engineering effort for example on ipv6 routing, OSPF etc. And the best part is they come with test automation framework. On 13/09/16, 4:22 PM, "Jayapal Uradi" wrote: >Hi, > >Instead of replacing the VR in first place we should

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
ptember 13, 2016 3:48 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > I can't seem to find any API documentation for CloudRouter. Maybe my > Google foo is weak. Has anyone else found any usable docs on that? > > *Will STEVENS* > Lead Devel

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
I can't seem to find any API documentation for CloudRouter. Maybe my Google foo is weak. Has anyone else found any usable docs on that? *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Tue,

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Marty Godsey
m] On Behalf Of Will Stevens Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 3:48 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR I can't seem to find any API documentation for CloudRouter. Maybe my Google foo is weak. Has anyone else found any usable docs on that? *Will STE

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
From: Marty Godsey >> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 12:05 PM >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR >> >> So it looks like we are eliminating CloudRouter. To many missing or non >> API managed features. >> >> But in reading Vy

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
(did I mention really) ugly. > > > From: Marty Godsey > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 12:05 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > So it looks like we are eliminating CloudRouter. To many miss

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
ens > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 12:58 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > Judging from this, it does not look like IPSec is managed via the API > though: > https://cloudrouter.atlassian.net/wiki/display/CPD/Bridging+ > Pub

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Simon Weller
Yeah, today, the agent uses a script to inject CLI via ssh into the VR. It's really (did I mention really) ugly. From: Marty Godsey Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 12:05 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR So it looks

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Marty Godsey
ssage- From: williamstev...@gmail.com [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Will Stevens Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 12:58 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Judging from this, it does not look like IPSec is managed via the AP

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
; Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 12:49 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > Does CloudRouter provide VPN (site-site and client)? Looking from their > website I don't seem to find it. Also, missing is VVRP for redundancy. Has > anyon

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Marty Godsey
It does.. Its under Secure Connectivity. -Original Message- From: Syed Ahmed [mailto:sah...@cloudops.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 12:49 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Does CloudRouter provide VPN (site-site and client)? Looking from

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Syed Ahmed
since I provide IPv6 /64 spaces to my customers > > and > > > I > > > > am having to provide it via an external router at the moment which > has > > a > > > > lot of manual configurations. > > > > > > > > Let me know if I can

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Marty Godsey
16 12:43 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR +1 on cloudrouter. We have been looking at this as a potential replacement/addon to our existing VRs. On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:07 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > yes, technically we should be able to just make

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Zaeem Arshad
l router at the moment which has > a > > > lot of manual configurations. > > > > > > Let me know if I can help in anyway. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] > > > Sent:

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
moment which has a > > lot of manual configurations. > > > > Let me know if I can help in anyway. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 7:21 AM > > To: dev@cloud

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Dustin Wright
AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > Ya. If we go this way, I like the approach of building the integration and > putting it through its paces as a stand alone VR before we consider > replacing the old VR and making it the defaul

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Marty Godsey
manual configurations. Let me know if I can help in anyway. -Original Message- From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 7:21 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Ya. If we go this way, I like the approach

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
Ya. If we go this way, I like the approach of building the integration and putting it through its paces as a stand alone VR before we consider replacing the old VR and making it the default. On Sep 13, 2016 6:52 AM, "Jayapal Uradi" wrote: > Hi, > > Instead of replacing the VR in first place we s

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Will Stevens
Ya. CloudRouter is interesting because it has a native api. For that reason it was brought up as an alternative to VyOS in our internal discussions. On Sep 13, 2016 5:23 AM, "Nux!" wrote: > Hi, > > I like the idea. > > Cloudrouter looks really promising, I'm not too keen on VyOS (it doesn't > ha

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Jayapal Uradi
Hi, Instead of replacing the VR in first place we should add VyOS/cloudrouter as provider. Once it is stable, network offerings (on upgrade) can be updated to use it and we can drop the VR if we want at that release onwards. VR is stabilized over a period of time and some of them are running wi

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-13 Thread Nux!
Hi, I like the idea. Cloudrouter looks really promising, I'm not too keen on VyOS (it doesn't have a proper http api etc). -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - > From: "Will Stevens" > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Monday

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-12 Thread Will Stevens
.@gmail.com] On > Behalf Of Will Stevens > Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 6:16 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > You have probably looked into this more than I have Rene. > > I am not sure there existed a time when the VR was ev

RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-12 Thread Marty Godsey
@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR You have probably looked into this more than I have Rene. I am not sure there existed a time when the VR was ever "great". In my eyes, the core ACS dev team should not be building and managing its own VR. I feel like that is a liabili

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-12 Thread Will Stevens
You have probably looked into this more than I have Rene. I am not sure there existed a time when the VR was ever "great". In my eyes, the core ACS dev team should not be building and managing its own VR. I feel like that is a liability because the subset of developers who are proficient in netw

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-12 Thread Rene Moser
Hi On 09/12/2016 10:20 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > *Disclaimer:* This is a thought experiment and should be treated as such. > Please weigh in with the good and bad of this idea... > > A couple of us have been discussing the idea of potentially replacing the > ACS VR with the VyOS [1] (Open Source

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-12 Thread Syed Ahmed
John, When you say to decompose the services to multiple containers? Where do you envision the containers be running? Surely, they must be running in some VM running on top of the hypervisor otherwise you would not be able to support all hypervisors. Now the question is, does each individual servi

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-12 Thread Will Stevens
Those are fair points John. I was going down the thought process of "if we have a VR, let's use an existing proven technology and not build our own". I think ACS needs an easy-to-use, out-of-the box default which anyone can use without having to think too much about it. It would be great if it w

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-12 Thread John Burwell
Will, Typo. “application model” was meant to be “appliance model”. Thanks, -John > john.burw...@shapeblue.com  www.shapeblue.com 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue On Sep 12, 2016, at 4:35 PM, John Burwell wrote: > > Will, > > I agree that we need to repl

Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR

2016-09-12 Thread John Burwell
Will, I agree that we need to replace the VR, but I am not convinced that continuing with the notion of a monolithic application model is a best direction. The problem with the current model is that it lacks flexibility. Some users only need to deploy DHCP and DNS across a zone where others n