Tempted to suggest some sort of special interest group where networking people can have some input into the dev process despite not necessarily being able to produce any code themselves. As an example, Schuberg Philis have recently done some great work on the redundant VPC VR but to a network person, this sort of functionality is almost taken for granted (please don't take this as a lack of appreciation). Similarly, the lack of end-to-end QoS for applications running on ACS seems to me at least to be a fairly significant oversight. ACS is known as having very flexible networking compared with some of the alternatives but there does still appear to be an enterprise focus on most elements that a 'typical' developer (dare I say it, web developer) faces but more of a home network approach to the networking side (aside from some pretty impressive niche features).
We shouldn't need to rely on proprietary 3rd party products to provide a similar level of versatility for networking in ACS in my opinion. It seems bizarre to me that we have load balancing, distributed routing & ACLs with the OVS controller, PVLANs for isolation, etc, but yet still don't have what I would consider basic functions such as better control over NAT, firewalling, routing (no dynamic routing protocols at all), IPsec, having to specify IP related attributes to what should simply be L2 constructs (why does a VPC need to be given a CIDR?!?) etc. AWS had a similar issue that lead to the VPC being introduced - enterprises consistently rejected the weird and illogical way that they did networking back in the day that was overly focussed on web/cloudy workloads. This sounds like a rant and to an extent it is but I'd like to turn it into a positive. I feel fairly helpless when the typical response to feedback like this is that I should just contribute code. There are a number of people that embrace the concept that the community should be a collective of not just developers, but at the same time it's pretty difficult to feel part of a community that's run almost uniquely by developers; it's even a bit intimidating at times. I've seen too many commercial companies that abandon innovation in favour of satisfying the 'large account' RFC/RFPs and in my opinion the same may apply to a project driven largely by the needs of those that can contribute code. To flip the concept on its head, it would be like a network guy creating an amazing cloud orchestration platform but where you can only run centos 6 with a LAMP stack - yes this might work for a lot of people (and it would likely only be adopted by those people) but for those that just want to do something a bit different, it would be a fairly frustrating experience. Am I simply being a spoilt kid here or is there room for input that might be constructive? Is there anyone here on the list with a networking focus that can corroborate these concerns? Adrian -----Original Message----- From: Somesh Naidu [mailto:somesh.na...@citrix.com] Sent: 20 February 2015 18:31 To: users@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: Network QoS (not bandwidth limiting) I don't think we can. QoS in CS is mostly throttling traffic on the virtual interface. Regards, Somesh -----Original Message----- From: len.bellem...@alternativenetworks.com [mailto:len.bellem...@alternativenetworks.com] Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 5:18 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Network QoS (not bandwidth limiting) Hi All, Does anyone know if it's possible to do network QoS in Cloudstack? I don't mean bandwidth limiting, but rather, prioritising different traffic types for voice, etc. Thanks Len
