I should say this check doesn't have to catch it...it might, but it doesn't
have to (depends on the value of one).
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> wrote:
> Yeah, in my case I'm just setting up a basic zone with a XenServer host.
>
> The code in NetUtils checks for null or "" on the variable in question
> that's passed in. However, in a certain case, null for that variable can
> slip by and lead to a NPE.
>
> if ((one == null || one.equals(""))
>
> &&
>
> (other == null || other.equals("")))
>
> {
>
> return true;
>
> }
>
> if other == null, this will not catch it and it can throw a NPE later.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadow...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> You can do "git blame (file)" and it will show you each line and the
>> commit. You can also do a git log on the file. The issue may not be as
>> obvious as that, though, there may be something totally unrelated causing
>> that object to end up null in this code. Or it may be specific to your
>> setup, some obscure bug nobody else is hitting.
>> On Jan 1, 2014 4:22 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > This is in 4.3.
>> >
>> > I know the file is NetUtils, but I'm not sure in Git how to look at the
>> > history of a particular file like I could do in SVN.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadow...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Which branch? I see these in master, you can check out the commit just
>> > > before these and see if it helps:
>> > >
>> > > commit b477e4e830597100f0c0171dd8e56f4033bd07aa
>> > > Author: Daan Hoogland <dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com>
>> > > Date: Tue Dec 31 12:52:51 2013 +0100
>> > >
>> > > some xtra cases
>> > >
>> > > commit 2cf356e047e26977c1d294fafc57e986c04fc5f4
>> > > Author: Daan Hoogland <dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com>
>> > > Date: Tue Dec 31 12:25:17 2013 +0100
>> > >
>> > > isSameIsolationId
>> > >
>> > > commit 04570eefed9a0ee1eca1fd700ed5732ba67150ce
>> > > Author: Daan Hoogland <d...@onecht.net>
>> > > Date: Fri Dec 20 16:47:58 2013 +0100
>> > >
>> > > check vlans and other isolation types
>> > >
>> > > commit d50517e931e68daef6735bd18273499fee0d4649
>> > > Author: Sateesh Chodapuneedi <sate...@apache.org>
>> > > Date: Tue Dec 31 07:16:35 2013 +0530
>> > >
>> > > I also have a commit just after these, but it was pretty minor and
>> > > only to KVM agent code.
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> > > <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> > > > Hey guys,
>> > > >
>> > > > The NPE I saw last night was related to "isolation id." Is it
>> possible
>> > > this
>> > > > NPE is related to something new that was put that you are talking
>> about
>> > > > here?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thank!
>> > > >
>> > > > ERROR [c.c.a.ApiServer] (1583467451@qtp-185135566-2:ctx-ae5d80b2
>> > > > ctx-5c12c4d9) unhandled exception executing api command:
>> > > createVlanIpRange
>> > > > java.lang.NullPointerException
>> > > > at
>> > com.cloud.utils.net.NetUtils.isSameIsolationId(NetUtils.java:1419)
>> > > > at com.cloud.configuration.ConfigurationManagerImpl.
>> > > > createVlanAndPublicIpRange(ConfigurationManagerImpl.java:2474)
>> > > > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>> > > > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>> > > > NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
>> > > > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>> > > > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>> > > > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:616)
>> > > > at org.springframework.aop.support.AopUtils.
>> > > > invokeJoinpointUsingReflection(AopUtils.java:317)
>> > > > at org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.
>> > > > invokeJoinpoint(ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:183)
>> > > > at
>> > > org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(
>> > > > ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:150)
>> > > > at com.cloud.event.ActionEventInterceptor.invoke(
>> > > > ActionEventInterceptor.java:50)
>> > > > at
>> > > org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(
>> > > > ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:161)
>> > > > at
>> org.springframework.aop.interceptor.ExposeInvocationInterceptor.
>> > > > invoke(ExposeInvocationInterceptor.java:91)
>> > > > at
>> > > org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(
>> > > > ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:172)
>> > > > at org.springframework.aop.framework.JdkDynamicAopProxy.
>> > > > invoke(JdkDynamicAopProxy.java:204)
>> > > > at sun.proxy.$Proxy96.createVlanAndPublicIpRange(Unknown Source)
>> > > > at org.apache.cloudstack.api.command.admin.vlan.
>> > > > CreateVlanIpRangeCmd.execute(CreateVlanIpRangeCmd.java:211)
>> > > > at com.cloud.api.ApiDispatcher.dispatch(ApiDispatcher.java:161)
>> > > > at com.cloud.api.ApiServer.queueCommand(ApiServer.java:530)
>> > > > at com.cloud.api.ApiServer.handleRequest(ApiServer.java:373)
>> > > > at
>> > > com.cloud.api.ApiServlet.processRequestInContext(ApiServlet.java:322)
>> > > > at com.cloud.api.ApiServlet.access$000(ApiServlet.java:52)
>> > > > at com.cloud.api.ApiServlet$1.run(ApiServlet.java:114)
>> > > > at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.
>> > > > DefaultManagedContext$1.call(DefaultManagedContext.java:56)
>> > > > at
>> > org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.
>> > > > callWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>> > > > at
>> > org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.
>> > > > runWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>> > > > at com.cloud.api.ApiServlet.processRequest(ApiServlet.java:111)
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> shadow...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> That's just it. The isolation type *is* provided when creating
>> > > >> physical network. If I create a physical network with isolation
>> type
>> > > >> 'VXLAN', and then add traffic type of 'Public', it doesn't obey it.
>> > > >> There's physical_networks and networks, when the zone is created,
>> an
>> > > >> entry goes in network that is Public/Vlan, hardcoded. The Public
>> > > >> traffic type uses this, regardless of what the physical_network its
>> > > >> being added to says. So if we updated the the public network table
>> row
>> > > >> with the correct isolation method for that physical network we are
>> > > >> adding traffic type to when we add the public traffic type, that
>> would
>> > > >> work. It's worth noting that a zone can only have one physical
>> network
>> > > >> with traffic type of public.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Daan Hoogland <
>> > daan.hoogl...@gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> While I've got your attention, what's the deal with isolation
>> > method
>> > > vs
>> > > >> broadcast method? These are always set to the same thing as far as
>> > I've
>> > > >> seen.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > I've been asking this but haven't found the answer yet. There is
>> an
>> > > >> > overlap but both have some extra values the other hasn't.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > I don't like either of your solutions but haven't got a good
>> > > >> > alternative. Best would be to be able to set the isolation type
>> on
>> > > >> > each physical network on creation. The wizard and zone creation
>> api
>> > > >> > command would have to be extended and allow for vlan as default.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > regards,
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> > shadow...@gmail.com>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> I suppose the answer might be to update the network with the
>> proper
>> > > >> >> isolation method when the traffic type is added. Look up the
>> > physical
>> > > >> >> network's isolation method, grab network object for the public
>> > > network,
>> > > >> and
>> > > >> >> set the right isolation.
>> > > >> >> On Jan 1, 2014 12:46 AM, "Marcus Sorensen" <shadow...@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>> I ran into an issue today that I'm still trying to wrap my
>> head
>> > > >> >>> around, and I wanted to bounce this off of you guys. I have a
>> > > physical
>> > > >> >>> network whose isolation method is set to 'VXLAN' (v4.3+). I
>> add my
>> > > >> >>> Public traffic type to it. I'd assume that nics generated for
>> > public
>> > > >> >>> traffic would have the standard vxlan:// URI for isolation
>> URI
>> > and
>> > > >> >>> broadcast URI, but they just have a vlan://. Digging into it,
>> it
>> > > seems
>> > > >> >>> that public traffic is hard-coded to BroadcastDomainType.Vlan.
>> I
>> > > fixed
>> > > >> >>> this fairly easily for my testing, there were only a few
>> places to
>> > > >> >>> fix, by pulling the BroadcastDomainType from the network object
>> > > rather
>> > > >> >>> than hardcoding it, but that found another problem. This only
>> > works
>> > > if
>> > > >> >>> I change the broadcast type in the 'networks' mysql table by
>> hand,
>> > > as
>> > > >> >>> during zone deployment the public network creation is also
>> > > hard-coded
>> > > >> >>> to vlan.
>> > > >> >>>
>> > > >> >>> I'm not sure how to go about fixing this, since the Public,
>> > > Control,
>> > > >> >>> Management networks are created upon zone deployment, (see
>> > > >> >>> createDefaultSystemNetworks). The immediate thing that jumped
>> out
>> > > was
>> > > >> >>> a config variable for public isolation method, set prior to
>> zone
>> > > >> >>> deployment, or perhaps even one that overrides what's in the
>> > table.
>> > > >> >>>
>> > > >> >>> While I've got your attention, what's the deal with isolation
>> > > method
>> > > >> >>> vs broadcast method? These are always set to the same thing as
>> far
>> > > as
>> > > >> >>> I've seen.
>> > > >> >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
>> > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> > > > o: 303.746.7302
>> > > > Advancing the way the world uses the
>> > > > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> > > > *™*
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > *Mike Tutkowski*
>> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> > o: 303.746.7302
>> > Advancing the way the world uses the
>> > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> > *™*
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the
> cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
> *™*
>
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*
