RE: [Add/Remove Network to VM] Multiple NICs on same Guest Network

2013-04-15 Thread Jayapal Reddy Uradi
The reason to choose multiple ips is  there is a limit (I think it is 7) on the 
hypervisor about number of nic can VM have.
For a nic you can have more than 7 ip addresses.
The multiple ips feature is supported in the basic zone also.

I think multiple nics feature is more useful when user need a nic in different 
network.

Thanks,
Jayapal

> -Original Message-
> From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, 15 April 2013 10:13 PM
> To: Saksham Srivastava
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Add/Remove Network to VM] Multiple NICs on same Guest
> Network
> 
> The functionality was duplicated from deploy allowing multiple NICs, and I
> wasn't involved in the discusion as to why that was decided. There could be
> other reasons why that was put in place, I don't know. At any rate it doesn't
> hurt anything in particular, and I'm not sure how many are using the
> capability in 4.0 and earlier, but they may have gotten used to it.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Saksham Srivastava <
> saksham.srivast...@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
> >   We have a feature Multiple IPs on the same NIC
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Multiple+IP+add
> > ress+per+NIC
> >
> > Isn't the functionality covered by this feature.
> >
> > I do not see a strong use case for having both the features (Multi NIC
> > in same network and Multi IP per NIC).
> > Should we allow only one of them, as they both tend to serve the same
> > purpose, or am I missing something?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Saksham
> >  --
> > *From:* Marcus Sorensen [shadow...@gmail.com]
> > *Sent:* Saturday, April 13, 2013 9:03 PM
> > *To:* Saksham Srivastava
> > *Cc:* dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > *Subject:* Re: [Add/Remove Network to VM] Multiple NICs on same
> Guest
> > Network
> >
> >   I believe it was allowed because one can also create multiple NICs
> > on the same network while deploying a VM.
> >
> > There may be people doing that to get multiple IPS auto-assigned to a VM.
> > On Apr 13, 2013 3:28 AM, "Saksham Srivastava" <
> > saksham.srivast...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >>  Hi,
> >>
> >> Using addNicToVirtualMachine API user can add multiple NICs to a VM
> >>
> >> I am also able to add multiple NICs to a VM on the same isolated
> >> guest network.
> >>
> >> Is this a valid scenario??
> >> If yes what could be the use case for the same?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Saksham
> >>
> >>


Re: [Add/Remove Network to VM] Multiple NICs on same Guest Network

2013-04-15 Thread Marcus Sorensen
The functionality was duplicated from deploy allowing multiple NICs, and I
wasn't involved in the discusion as to why that was decided. There could be
other reasons why that was put in place, I don't know. At any rate it
doesn't hurt anything in particular, and I'm not sure how many are using
the capability in 4.0 and earlier, but they may have gotten used to it.


On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Saksham Srivastava <
saksham.srivast...@citrix.com> wrote:

>   We have a feature Multiple IPs on the same NIC
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Multiple+IP+address+per+NIC
>
> Isn't the functionality covered by this feature.
>
> I do not see a strong use case for having both the features (Multi NIC in
> same network and Multi IP per NIC).
> Should we allow only one of them, as they both tend to serve the same
> purpose, or am I missing something?
>
> Thanks,
> Saksham
>  --
> *From:* Marcus Sorensen [shadow...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 13, 2013 9:03 PM
> *To:* Saksham Srivastava
> *Cc:* dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Add/Remove Network to VM] Multiple NICs on same Guest
> Network
>
>   I believe it was allowed because one can also create multiple NICs on
> the same network while deploying a VM.
>
> There may be people doing that to get multiple IPS auto-assigned to a VM.
> On Apr 13, 2013 3:28 AM, "Saksham Srivastava" <
> saksham.srivast...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>  Hi,
>>
>> Using addNicToVirtualMachine API user can add multiple NICs to a VM
>>
>> I am also able to add multiple NICs to a VM on the same isolated guest
>> network.
>>
>> Is this a valid scenario??
>> If yes what could be the use case for the same?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Saksham
>>
>>


RE: [Add/Remove Network to VM] Multiple NICs on same Guest Network

2013-04-15 Thread Saksham Srivastava
We have a feature Multiple IPs on the same NIC 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Multiple+IP+address+per+NIC

Isn't the functionality covered by this feature.

I do not see a strong use case for having both the features (Multi NIC in same 
network and Multi IP per NIC).
Should we allow only one of them, as they both tend to serve the same purpose, 
or am I missing something?

Thanks,
Saksham

From: Marcus Sorensen [shadow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 9:03 PM
To: Saksham Srivastava
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Add/Remove Network to VM] Multiple NICs on same Guest Network


I believe it was allowed because one can also create multiple NICs on the same 
network while deploying a VM.

There may be people doing that to get multiple IPS auto-assigned to a VM.

On Apr 13, 2013 3:28 AM, "Saksham Srivastava" 
mailto:saksham.srivast...@citrix.com>> wrote:
Hi,

Using addNicToVirtualMachine API user can add multiple NICs to a VM

I am also able to add multiple NICs to a VM on the same isolated guest network.

Is this a valid scenario??
If yes what could be the use case for the same?

Thanks,
Saksham



Re: [Add/Remove Network to VM] Multiple NICs on same Guest Network

2013-04-13 Thread Marcus Sorensen
I believe it was allowed because one can also create multiple NICs on the
same network while deploying a VM.

There may be people doing that to get multiple IPS auto-assigned to a VM.
On Apr 13, 2013 3:28 AM, "Saksham Srivastava" 
wrote:

>  Hi,
>
> Using addNicToVirtualMachine API user can add multiple NICs to a VM
>
> I am also able to add multiple NICs to a VM on the same isolated guest
> network.
>
> Is this a valid scenario??
> If yes what could be the use case for the same?
>
> Thanks,
> Saksham
>
>