Oh great! Yes, 4.4 is the current master.
>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Hair [mailto:j...@greenqloud.com] >Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 3:16 PM >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >Subject: Re: EC2 Rest Servlet "domain cannot be null!!" Error In Advanced >Networking Mode > >Hi Likitha, > >The fix you committed is actually the exact same way we wound up fixing it, >although we put ours on the mirror of the 4.2.1 branch that we have. Since you >said the EC2 REST/SOAP API hasn't been well-tested in advanced mode >networking, we may run into more issues like this. If we do, and we want to >submit our own fixes for review, should we submit against the 4.4 branch? > >Jeff > > >On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Likitha Shetty ><likitha.she...@citrix.com>wrote: > >> Jeff, what you have reported is a bug. Created an issue to track it in >> in JIRA - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5998 . >> >> BTW you mentioned that you trying EC2 Query API against a setup with >> Advanced networking? I just want to point out that AFAIK, we have >> never tested EC2 REST/SOAP API compatibility in a setup with Advanced >networking. >> >> Thanks, >> Likitha >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Jeff Hair [mailto:j...@greenqloud.com] >> >Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 6:38 PM >> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> >Subject: EC2 Rest Servlet "domain cannot be null!!" Error In Advanced >> >Networking Mode >> > >> >Hi, >> > >> >We're trying to query the EC2 REST API. Most of it works, but we're >> running into >> >an issue when calling describe addresses. It returns a fault with >> >"domain >> cannot >> >be null!!" as the error text. I've traced this down to CloudStack not >> setting the >> >EC2 domain (standard or vpc) in the >> >EC2SoapServiceImpl#toDescribeAddressesResponse static method. The >> >domain property is not being set, and then it explodes on >> >serialization with the >> above >> >error. >> > >> >So, my questions are these: >> > >> >1. Is this a bug in CloudStack with the EC2 API and Advanced Networking? >> Or are >> >we missing some configuration/setting? >> >2. If this is actually a bug, what is the best way to work around it >> temporarily, >> >and also where to start fixing it for real in the CS codebase? >> > >> >Thanks, >> > >> >Jeff >>
