Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/#review46718 --- Alex, As discussed on the mailing list, ORIGINATEDREGIONUUID should be the regionId which is Long. So all the ORIGINATEDREGIONUUID references should just be ORIGINATEDREGIONID and of datatype Long. - Kishan Kavala On June 24, 2014, 9:24 p.m., Alex Ough wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/ --- (Updated June 24, 2014, 9:24 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- This is the review request for the core changes related with #17790 that has only the new plugin codes. Diffs - api/src/com/cloud/event/EventTypes.java 0fa3cd5 api/src/com/cloud/user/AccountService.java eac8a76 api/src/com/cloud/user/DomainService.java 4c1f93d api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java adda5f4 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/BaseCmd.java ac9a208 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/CreateAccountCmd.java 50d67d9 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DeleteAccountCmd.java 5754ec5 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DisableAccountCmd.java 3e5e1d3 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/EnableAccountCmd.java f30c985 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/LockAccountCmd.java 3c185e4 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/UpdateAccountCmd.java a7ce74a api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/CreateDomainCmd.java 312c9ee api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/DeleteDomainCmd.java a6d2b0b api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/UpdateDomainCmd.java 409a84d api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/AddRegionCmd.java f6743ba api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/UpdateRegionCmd.java b08cbbb api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/CreateUserCmd.java 8f223ac api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DeleteUserCmd.java 08ba521 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DisableUserCmd.java c6e09ef api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/EnableUserCmd.java d69eccf api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/LockUserCmd.java 69623d0 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/RegisterCmd.java 2090d21 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/UpdateUserCmd.java f21e264 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/RegionResponse.java 6c74fa6 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/Region.java df64e44 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionService.java afefcc7 api/test/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/test/RegionCmdTest.java 10c3d85 client/pom.xml 29fef4f engine/schema/resources/META-INF/cloudstack/core/spring-engine-schema-core-daos-context.xml 2ef0d20 engine/schema/src/com/cloud/user/AccountVO.java 0f5a044 engine/schema/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionVO.java 608bd2b plugins/network-elements/juniper-contrail/test/org/apache/cloudstack/network/contrail/management/MockAccountManager.java 4136b5c plugins/pom.xml b5e6a61 plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapCreateAccountCmd.java b753952 plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapImportUsersCmd.java 6f7be90 server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java f1f0d2c server/src/com/cloud/api/dispatch/ParamProcessWorker.java 1592b93 server/src/com/cloud/event/ActionEventUtils.java 2b3cfea server/src/com/cloud/projects/ProjectManagerImpl.java d10c059 server/src/com/cloud/user/AccountManager.java 194c5d2 server/src/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImpl.java 7a889f1 server/src/com/cloud/user/DomainManager.java f72b18a server/src/com/cloud/user/DomainManagerImpl.java fbbe0c2 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManager.java 6f25481 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManagerImpl.java 8910714 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionServiceImpl.java 98cf500 server/test/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImplTest.java 176cf1d server/test/com/cloud/user/MockAccountManagerImpl.java 746fa1b server/test/com/cloud/user/MockDomainManagerImpl.java 7dddefb server/test/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManagerTest.java d7bc537 setup/db/db/schema-440to450.sql ee419a2 ui/scripts/regions.js 368c1bf Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/diff/ Testing --- 1. Successfully tested real time
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/#review46719 --- Alex, As discussed on the mailing list, ORIGINATEDREGIONUUID should be the regionId which is Long. So all the ORIGINATEDREGIONUUID references should just be ORIGINATEDREGIONID and of datatype Long. - Kishan Kavala On June 24, 2014, 9:24 p.m., Alex Ough wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/ --- (Updated June 24, 2014, 9:24 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- This is the review request for the core changes related with #17790 that has only the new plugin codes. Diffs - api/src/com/cloud/event/EventTypes.java 0fa3cd5 api/src/com/cloud/user/AccountService.java eac8a76 api/src/com/cloud/user/DomainService.java 4c1f93d api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java adda5f4 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/BaseCmd.java ac9a208 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/CreateAccountCmd.java 50d67d9 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DeleteAccountCmd.java 5754ec5 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DisableAccountCmd.java 3e5e1d3 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/EnableAccountCmd.java f30c985 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/LockAccountCmd.java 3c185e4 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/UpdateAccountCmd.java a7ce74a api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/CreateDomainCmd.java 312c9ee api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/DeleteDomainCmd.java a6d2b0b api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/UpdateDomainCmd.java 409a84d api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/AddRegionCmd.java f6743ba api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/UpdateRegionCmd.java b08cbbb api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/CreateUserCmd.java 8f223ac api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DeleteUserCmd.java 08ba521 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DisableUserCmd.java c6e09ef api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/EnableUserCmd.java d69eccf api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/LockUserCmd.java 69623d0 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/RegisterCmd.java 2090d21 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/UpdateUserCmd.java f21e264 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/RegionResponse.java 6c74fa6 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/Region.java df64e44 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionService.java afefcc7 api/test/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/test/RegionCmdTest.java 10c3d85 client/pom.xml 29fef4f engine/schema/resources/META-INF/cloudstack/core/spring-engine-schema-core-daos-context.xml 2ef0d20 engine/schema/src/com/cloud/user/AccountVO.java 0f5a044 engine/schema/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionVO.java 608bd2b plugins/network-elements/juniper-contrail/test/org/apache/cloudstack/network/contrail/management/MockAccountManager.java 4136b5c plugins/pom.xml b5e6a61 plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapCreateAccountCmd.java b753952 plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapImportUsersCmd.java 6f7be90 server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java f1f0d2c server/src/com/cloud/api/dispatch/ParamProcessWorker.java 1592b93 server/src/com/cloud/event/ActionEventUtils.java 2b3cfea server/src/com/cloud/projects/ProjectManagerImpl.java d10c059 server/src/com/cloud/user/AccountManager.java 194c5d2 server/src/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImpl.java 7a889f1 server/src/com/cloud/user/DomainManager.java f72b18a server/src/com/cloud/user/DomainManagerImpl.java fbbe0c2 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManager.java 6f25481 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManagerImpl.java 8910714 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionServiceImpl.java 98cf500 server/test/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImplTest.java 176cf1d server/test/com/cloud/user/MockAccountManagerImpl.java 746fa1b server/test/com/cloud/user/MockDomainManagerImpl.java 7dddefb server/test/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManagerTest.java d7bc537 setup/db/db/schema-440to450.sql ee419a2 ui/scripts/regions.js 368c1bf Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/diff/ Testing --- 1. Successfully tested real time
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/#review46720 --- engine/schema/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionVO.java https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/#comment82279 You can use @Encrypt annotation to encrypt and decrypt password. Framework will do the encryption instead of doing md5hash while persisting. You can refer to VpnUserVO.java to see an example. - Kishan Kavala On June 24, 2014, 9:24 p.m., Alex Ough wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/ --- (Updated June 24, 2014, 9:24 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- This is the review request for the core changes related with #17790 that has only the new plugin codes. Diffs - api/src/com/cloud/event/EventTypes.java 0fa3cd5 api/src/com/cloud/user/AccountService.java eac8a76 api/src/com/cloud/user/DomainService.java 4c1f93d api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java adda5f4 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/BaseCmd.java ac9a208 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/CreateAccountCmd.java 50d67d9 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DeleteAccountCmd.java 5754ec5 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DisableAccountCmd.java 3e5e1d3 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/EnableAccountCmd.java f30c985 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/LockAccountCmd.java 3c185e4 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/UpdateAccountCmd.java a7ce74a api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/CreateDomainCmd.java 312c9ee api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/DeleteDomainCmd.java a6d2b0b api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/UpdateDomainCmd.java 409a84d api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/AddRegionCmd.java f6743ba api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/UpdateRegionCmd.java b08cbbb api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/CreateUserCmd.java 8f223ac api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DeleteUserCmd.java 08ba521 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DisableUserCmd.java c6e09ef api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/EnableUserCmd.java d69eccf api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/LockUserCmd.java 69623d0 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/RegisterCmd.java 2090d21 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/UpdateUserCmd.java f21e264 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/RegionResponse.java 6c74fa6 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/Region.java df64e44 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionService.java afefcc7 api/test/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/test/RegionCmdTest.java 10c3d85 client/pom.xml 29fef4f engine/schema/resources/META-INF/cloudstack/core/spring-engine-schema-core-daos-context.xml 2ef0d20 engine/schema/src/com/cloud/user/AccountVO.java 0f5a044 engine/schema/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionVO.java 608bd2b plugins/network-elements/juniper-contrail/test/org/apache/cloudstack/network/contrail/management/MockAccountManager.java 4136b5c plugins/pom.xml b5e6a61 plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapCreateAccountCmd.java b753952 plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapImportUsersCmd.java 6f7be90 server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java f1f0d2c server/src/com/cloud/api/dispatch/ParamProcessWorker.java 1592b93 server/src/com/cloud/event/ActionEventUtils.java 2b3cfea server/src/com/cloud/projects/ProjectManagerImpl.java d10c059 server/src/com/cloud/user/AccountManager.java 194c5d2 server/src/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImpl.java 7a889f1 server/src/com/cloud/user/DomainManager.java f72b18a server/src/com/cloud/user/DomainManagerImpl.java fbbe0c2 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManager.java 6f25481 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManagerImpl.java 8910714 server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionServiceImpl.java 98cf500 server/test/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImplTest.java 176cf1d server/test/com/cloud/user/MockAccountManagerImpl.java 746fa1b server/test/com/cloud/user/MockDomainManagerImpl.java 7dddefb server/test/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManagerTest.java d7bc537 setup/db/db/schema-440to450.sql ee419a2 ui/scripts/regions.js 368c1bf
Re: Review Request 22955: CLOUDSTACK-6985: Re-enabling test_02_deploy_vm_root_resize
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22955/#review46721 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Girish Shilamkar On June 25, 2014, 1:32 p.m., Gaurav Aradhye wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22955/ --- (Updated June 25, 2014, 1:32 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Girish Shilamkar. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Enabling test case test_02_deploy_vm_root_resize, as the issue is not reproducible. Diffs - test/integration/smoke/test_deploy_vm_root_resize.py 269b321 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22955/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Gaurav Aradhye
Re: Review Request 22934: CLOUDSTACK-6984: Fixing few issues found durign simulator run
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22934/#review46722 --- Commit 039878b49a821cd1fd52e0ead0f528c3e9371a0c in cloudstack's branch refs/heads/4.4-forward from Girish Shilamkar [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=039878b ] CLOUDSTACK-6984: Re-enable the testcase - ASF Subversion and Git Services On June 24, 2014, 3:04 p.m., Gaurav Aradhye wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22934/ --- (Updated June 24, 2014, 3:04 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Girish Shilamkar. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6984 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6984 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Fixing issues found in simulator run. 1. test_01_stop_vm failed on simulator because of escape sequences present in the response from simulator 2. test_releaseIP failed due to incorrect listing of IP address. The IP address which was was associated was not listed exactly (Listed by passing account id and domain id which listed other IP addresses associated with the account along with desired IP). The IP address which is not used for source nat should get listed instead. Diffs - test/integration/smoke/test_network.py 0ae777e test/integration/smoke/test_vm_life_cycle.py 9ab7848 tools/marvin/marvin/lib/base.py c3d98c9 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22934/diff/ Testing --- yes. Thanks, Gaurav Aradhye
Re: [ACS45][ACS50][PROPOSAL] move forward feature freeze
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com wrote: In response to Brocade I see your response feature should be done (in it's branch) by 19th july. merging and fixing issues may take to mid august that essentially means feature freeze (cutting the branch) by mid august it means code freeze at mid august., not feature freeze. -- Daan
Re: OpenVM.eu - repository of Cloudstack images and appliances
love it Lucian, How will the procedure for submissions look? (I'm thinking a mail to you with a download link) On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 1:18 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: This is awesome on Nux's part. I am thrilled to see this come to fruition. This is not an official CloudStack deployment. There are a number of reasons why this needs to be external (for instance, much of what he has up for download is GPL-licensed; it's not our software, etc) In addition, Infra does well to distribute the software we actually produce, we'd politely decline the offer to provide a service like Nux has stood up. :) --David On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Sally Khudairi sallykhuda...@yahoo.com.invalid wrote: Cool --thanks, Lucian! Just so I understand, this is a supporting repository and not an official CloudStack project resource, correct? If so, totally fine: please do continue as intended. If not, I suspect this might need to reside somewhere in the cloudstack.apache.org/* home. I'd love feedback from the community if you're planning to give folks a peek at tomorrow's meeting! Cheers, Sally From: Nux! n...@li.nux.ro To: market...@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; us...@cloudstack.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 15:09 Subject: OpenVM.eu - repository of Cloudstack images and appliances Hi, I've been intending to do this for a while, but decided it has to happen this summer so here goes: http://www.openvm.eu - A repository of Cloudstack images and appliances! Do not be fooled by it's current façade, it will get better. It only has one template for now, but I expect this number to increase significantly in the coming weeks. It is just what I managed to do in a very short time at $work today and thought it might be worth a mention at tomorrow's European meeting in London. I'll add a lot more templates, with a focus on CentOS and Cloudstack, of course, as this is where my interests lie at the moment. In time I will add more OSes and platforms (Openstack and OpenNebula). The templates are built on/for KVM, but should be able to boot on a variety of hypervisors (I think it will work on Xen/Xenserver, VMware, HyperV), although the file format is QCOW2. I'll have to check my resources to see if I can afford the extra disk space and CPU time to offer VHD/RAW files as well. All templates are 8 GB in size unless specified otherwise. I'll keep the list updated. Comments, questions, suggestions etc welcome! Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro -- Daan
Re: OpenVM.eu - repository of Cloudstack images and appliances
Daan, Yup, a link will do just fine for now. In addition to that I'll require also the kickstart file used to build it. The images will have to be rebuilt regularly so we don't ship vulnerable/obsolete stuff. I'll have to write some sort of FAQ on this. Lucian - Original Message - From: Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com To: dev dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Sally Khudairi sallykhuda...@yahoo.com, market...@cloudstack.apache.org, us...@cloudstack.apache.org Sent: Thursday, 26 June, 2014 8:05:14 AM Subject: Re: OpenVM.eu - repository of Cloudstack images and appliances love it Lucian, How will the procedure for submissions look? (I'm thinking a mail to you with a download link)
Re: Review Request 22934: CLOUDSTACK-6984: Fixing few issues found durign simulator run
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22934/#review46728 --- Commit 7bc997f4fbaa80ed6335ba3658baaee5c9cb8e48 in cloudstack's branch refs/heads/master from Girish Shilamkar [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=7bc997f ] CLOUDSTACK-6984: Re-enable the testcase - ASF Subversion and Git Services On June 24, 2014, 3:04 p.m., Gaurav Aradhye wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22934/ --- (Updated June 24, 2014, 3:04 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Girish Shilamkar. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6984 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6984 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Fixing issues found in simulator run. 1. test_01_stop_vm failed on simulator because of escape sequences present in the response from simulator 2. test_releaseIP failed due to incorrect listing of IP address. The IP address which was was associated was not listed exactly (Listed by passing account id and domain id which listed other IP addresses associated with the account along with desired IP). The IP address which is not used for source nat should get listed instead. Diffs - test/integration/smoke/test_network.py 0ae777e test/integration/smoke/test_vm_life_cycle.py 9ab7848 tools/marvin/marvin/lib/base.py c3d98c9 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22934/diff/ Testing --- yes. Thanks, Gaurav Aradhye
Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0?
Hi All, I have been following the IAM functionality work from quite sometime. And I am interested in this work and would like to contribute in the API changes and discussions. If there are any design documents or any Jira tickets related to these changes can you please point me to them that will be helpful. From looking over the API changes documentation for the IAM feature I was curious if everything you set out to accomplish that is mentioned here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/API+changes is completed ? Thanks Meghna. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:03 PM, Prachi Damle prachi.da...@citrix.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Meghna Kale [mailto:meghna.k...@sungardas.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 11:24 PM To: dev Cc: Daan Hoogland; Hugo Trippaers Subject: Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0? Thanks Min and Prachi. Based on above, for your usecase, you can attach a new policy to one account to deny specific operations. So even if that account belongs to the group that allows All, the second policy has an explicit Deny, so this will deny the specific operations. Does that mean that a new deny permission role should be created and then applied to the user? If yes then is it like we are apply two roles to a single user. Yes it means attaching two policies to the account. The policy evaluation logic should look at all the policies attached and evaluate using the precedence. Thanks Meghna. Thanks Meghna. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Prachi Damle prachi.da...@citrix.com wrote: For example, there are two accounts and they belong to a group with Allow all permissions. If I have to remove some permissions for only account 1 but keep them for account 2 is it possible? This will be decided depending on whether Deny has higher precedence over Allow or the other way. If Deny has the higher precedence, the evaluation logic will be: - If there is a policy attached to the account or to a group that the account belongs to, which states an explicit Deny, then the permission will be denied. Based on above, for your usecase, you can attach a new policy to one account to deny specific operations. So even if that account belongs to the group that allows All, the second policy has an explicit Deny, so this will deny the specific operations. Thanks, Prachi -Original Message- From: Min Chen [mailto:min.c...@citrix.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 9:30 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Daan Hoogland; Hugo Trippaers Subject: Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0? As mentioned in our FS doc in wiki, In phase I, all the permissions attached to any policy are by default explicit 'Allow' permissions. As of now 'Deny' permissions cannot be added. For your use cases, you can have two options: 1. Assign the two accounts into 2 different groups, and attach different policy for the group. 2. Directly attach an Allow policy to account 2 instead of assigning both accounts into the Allow All group. Thanks -min On 6/3/14 5:03 AM, Meghna Kale meghna.k...@sungardas.com wrote: Hi Min, With reference to the wiki doc, I had a query. In case of a customized role with deny permissions how will the listAll, isrecursive ..etc. input parameters values will be ? For example, there are two accounts and they belong to a group with Allow all permissions. If I have to remove some permissions for only account 1 but keep them for account 2 is it possible? Thanks Meghna. On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:22 PM, Min Chen min.c...@citrix.com wrote: Added API issues we found through IAM feature in the wiki page created by Demetrius: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/API+changes Thanks -min On 5/14/14 9:34 AM, Min Chen min.c...@citrix.com wrote: Thanks Daan. Yes, I saw that there is another thread about putting an API request for 5.0 api. Once we are done with this disabling, we will put the issues we have found with current API in that wiki page to take into consideration when we design the new API. -min On 5/14/14 12:12 AM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: Min, I think everybody knows I am all for less features per release. I don't think you are making a bad call, per se. I do think we should consider if we can come up with a total picture of what 5.x would require af the api, though. Can you add to the discussion what it is that is keeping you from implementing. And what requirements you have for the 5.0 api so we can start devising the architectural guidelines for the new api. more and more calls for a 5.0 are coming up lately so let's move forward. (changing title) On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Min Chen min.c...@citrix.com wrote: Hi All, In the past several weeks, QA has
[Issue]: Cannot start virtual router
Hi, I am a CloudStack user, below issues blocked me, would you please help to check? For hyper-v, systemvms are running successfully. But when creating a hyper-v VM, could not start the virtual router as following, the Link Local IP Address is always 0.0.0.0 Thanks, Chunmei
Re: Review Request 22554: CLOUDSTACK-6909 - fix marvin's handling of SMB credentials for storage
On 25/06/14 11:30 pm, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Santhosh Edukulla santhosh.eduku...@citrix.com wrote: ... Team uses 4.4-forward marvin to test the changes. You should really not test 4.4-forward, but 4.4! It is mainly about testing and fixing the Marvin framework. Didn¹t want to interfere with the current release. -abhi
RE: [Issue]: Cannot start virtual router
Hi Is the VR started successfully? Is the systemvms(ssvm, cpvm) have got configured successfully! Were you able to view the console of VMs! Share the logs why vm deployment is failing. Am not able to see the screenshot. Thanks Rajesh Battala From: huangchunmei [mailto:huangchun...@internetware.cn] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 8:18 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [Issue]: Cannot start virtual router Hi, I am a CloudStack user, below issues blocked me, would you please help to check? For hyper-v, systemvms are running successfully. But when creating a hyper-v VM, could not start the virtual router as following, the Link Local IP Address is always 0.0.0.0 [cid:image001.jpg@01CF912A.DC92DCE0] Thanks, Chunmei
Review Request 23008: Reverted the hardcoding fix for SR-Label: and Path: strings
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/ --- Review request for cloudstack, Brian Federle and Jessica Wang. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Reverted the hard-coding fix for strings Path: and SR-Name Label:. Diffs - ui/scripts/system.js 67e01f1 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/diff/ Testing --- No Thanks, Vetrivel Chinnasamy
Review Request 23009: Fix for test_portable_ip.py script issues
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23009/ --- Review request for cloudstack, Santhosh Edukulla and SrikanteswaraRao Talluri. Bugs: CS-6992 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CS-6992 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- 1.Currently the test is not reading test data from the config file. So I have made changes in the script to read test data and use it in all the test methods 2.Reading portable ip config values was not proper in getPortableIpRangeServices in lib/common.py so made changes in the library to read portable ip values properly Diffs - test/integration/component/test_portable_ip.py b9c9059 tools/marvin/marvin/lib/common.py 7b0c7ad Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23009/diff/ Testing --- Yes Thanks, sanjeev n
Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0?
Megha, the page you mention is a collection bin for all things planned that are going to require a major version upgrade as they change the application programming interface. It is not just for the IAM extensions planned. It is completed only when 5.0 is out ;) Feel free to add to it or to propose implementing parts of it. regards On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Meghna Kale meghna.k...@sungardas.com wrote: Hi All, I have been following the IAM functionality work from quite sometime. And I am interested in this work and would like to contribute in the API changes and discussions. If there are any design documents or any Jira tickets related to these changes can you please point me to them that will be helpful. From looking over the API changes documentation for the IAM feature I was curious if everything you set out to accomplish that is mentioned here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/API+changes is completed ? Thanks Meghna. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:03 PM, Prachi Damle prachi.da...@citrix.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Meghna Kale [mailto:meghna.k...@sungardas.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 11:24 PM To: dev Cc: Daan Hoogland; Hugo Trippaers Subject: Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0? Thanks Min and Prachi. Based on above, for your usecase, you can attach a new policy to one account to deny specific operations. So even if that account belongs to the group that allows All, the second policy has an explicit Deny, so this will deny the specific operations. Does that mean that a new deny permission role should be created and then applied to the user? If yes then is it like we are apply two roles to a single user. Yes it means attaching two policies to the account. The policy evaluation logic should look at all the policies attached and evaluate using the precedence. Thanks Meghna. Thanks Meghna. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Prachi Damle prachi.da...@citrix.com wrote: For example, there are two accounts and they belong to a group with Allow all permissions. If I have to remove some permissions for only account 1 but keep them for account 2 is it possible? This will be decided depending on whether Deny has higher precedence over Allow or the other way. If Deny has the higher precedence, the evaluation logic will be: - If there is a policy attached to the account or to a group that the account belongs to, which states an explicit Deny, then the permission will be denied. Based on above, for your usecase, you can attach a new policy to one account to deny specific operations. So even if that account belongs to the group that allows All, the second policy has an explicit Deny, so this will deny the specific operations. Thanks, Prachi -Original Message- From: Min Chen [mailto:min.c...@citrix.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 9:30 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Daan Hoogland; Hugo Trippaers Subject: Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0? As mentioned in our FS doc in wiki, In phase I, all the permissions attached to any policy are by default explicit 'Allow' permissions. As of now 'Deny' permissions cannot be added. For your use cases, you can have two options: 1. Assign the two accounts into 2 different groups, and attach different policy for the group. 2. Directly attach an Allow policy to account 2 instead of assigning both accounts into the Allow All group. Thanks -min On 6/3/14 5:03 AM, Meghna Kale meghna.k...@sungardas.com wrote: Hi Min, With reference to the wiki doc, I had a query. In case of a customized role with deny permissions how will the listAll, isrecursive ..etc. input parameters values will be ? For example, there are two accounts and they belong to a group with Allow all permissions. If I have to remove some permissions for only account 1 but keep them for account 2 is it possible? Thanks Meghna. On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:22 PM, Min Chen min.c...@citrix.com wrote: Added API issues we found through IAM feature in the wiki page created by Demetrius: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/API+changes Thanks -min On 5/14/14 9:34 AM, Min Chen min.c...@citrix.com wrote: Thanks Daan. Yes, I saw that there is another thread about putting an API request for 5.0 api. Once we are done with this disabling, we will put the issues we have found with current API in that wiki page to take into consideration when we design the new API. -min On 5/14/14 12:12 AM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: Min, I think everybody knows I am all for less features per release. I don't think you are making a bad call, per se. I do think we should consider if we can come up with a total picture of what 5.x would require af the api, though.
Re: Review Request 22554: CLOUDSTACK-6909 - fix marvin's handling of SMB credentials for storage
if it is test code it will hardly interfere with the release, If it does it is extra important to know about it early. The only reason to not put them in the 4.4 branch is because you don't want them in the 4.4.0 release. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Abhinandan Prateek abhinandan.prat...@citrix.com wrote: On 25/06/14 11:30 pm, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Santhosh Edukulla santhosh.eduku...@citrix.com wrote: ... Team uses 4.4-forward marvin to test the changes. You should really not test 4.4-forward, but 4.4! It is mainly about testing and fixing the Marvin framework. Didn¹t want to interfere with the current release. -abhi -- Daan
Re: Review Request 22554: CLOUDSTACK-6909 - fix marvin's handling of SMB credentials for storage
+1! I’ve been slowly trying to figure out which part of the public marvin test infrastructure we can run against our test infrastructure (and then, later on, add our own tests to the public set…). Having some kind of a defined set of “these tests belong with and pass against 4.4.0 (in the citrix QA environment)” would be a _huge_ help. Cheers, Leo On 6/26/14, 3:21 PM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: if it is test code it will hardly interfere with the release, If it does it is extra important to know about it early. The only reason to not put them in the 4.4 branch is because you don't want them in the 4.4.0 release. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Abhinandan Prateek abhinandan.prat...@citrix.com wrote: On 25/06/14 11:30 pm, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Santhosh Edukulla santhosh.eduku...@citrix.com wrote: ... Team uses 4.4-forward marvin to test the changes. You should really not test 4.4-forward, but 4.4! It is mainly about testing and fixing the Marvin framework. Didn¹t want to interfere with the current release. -abhi -- Daan
Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0?
Thanks Daan. With completion I meant the documentation part. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: Megha, the page you mention is a collection bin for all things planned that are going to require a major version upgrade as they change the application programming interface. It is not just for the IAM extensions planned. It is completed only when 5.0 is out ;) Feel free to add to it or to propose implementing parts of it. regards On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Meghna Kale meghna.k...@sungardas.com wrote: Hi All, I have been following the IAM functionality work from quite sometime. And I am interested in this work and would like to contribute in the API changes and discussions. If there are any design documents or any Jira tickets related to these changes can you please point me to them that will be helpful. From looking over the API changes documentation for the IAM feature I was curious if everything you set out to accomplish that is mentioned here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/API+changes is completed ? Thanks Meghna. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:03 PM, Prachi Damle prachi.da...@citrix.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Meghna Kale [mailto:meghna.k...@sungardas.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 11:24 PM To: dev Cc: Daan Hoogland; Hugo Trippaers Subject: Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0? Thanks Min and Prachi. Based on above, for your usecase, you can attach a new policy to one account to deny specific operations. So even if that account belongs to the group that allows All, the second policy has an explicit Deny, so this will deny the specific operations. Does that mean that a new deny permission role should be created and then applied to the user? If yes then is it like we are apply two roles to a single user. Yes it means attaching two policies to the account. The policy evaluation logic should look at all the policies attached and evaluate using the precedence. Thanks Meghna. Thanks Meghna. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Prachi Damle prachi.da...@citrix.com wrote: For example, there are two accounts and they belong to a group with Allow all permissions. If I have to remove some permissions for only account 1 but keep them for account 2 is it possible? This will be decided depending on whether Deny has higher precedence over Allow or the other way. If Deny has the higher precedence, the evaluation logic will be: - If there is a policy attached to the account or to a group that the account belongs to, which states an explicit Deny, then the permission will be denied. Based on above, for your usecase, you can attach a new policy to one account to deny specific operations. So even if that account belongs to the group that allows All, the second policy has an explicit Deny, so this will deny the specific operations. Thanks, Prachi -Original Message- From: Min Chen [mailto:min.c...@citrix.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 9:30 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Daan Hoogland; Hugo Trippaers Subject: Re: [ACS5.0] IAM feature postponed from 4.4 to 5.0? As mentioned in our FS doc in wiki, In phase I, all the permissions attached to any policy are by default explicit 'Allow' permissions. As of now 'Deny' permissions cannot be added. For your use cases, you can have two options: 1. Assign the two accounts into 2 different groups, and attach different policy for the group. 2. Directly attach an Allow policy to account 2 instead of assigning both accounts into the Allow All group. Thanks -min On 6/3/14 5:03 AM, Meghna Kale meghna.k...@sungardas.com wrote: Hi Min, With reference to the wiki doc, I had a query. In case of a customized role with deny permissions how will the listAll, isrecursive ..etc. input parameters values will be ? For example, there are two accounts and they belong to a group with Allow all permissions. If I have to remove some permissions for only account 1 but keep them for account 2 is it possible? Thanks Meghna. On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:22 PM, Min Chen min.c...@citrix.com wrote: Added API issues we found through IAM feature in the wiki page created by Demetrius: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/API+changes Thanks -min On 5/14/14 9:34 AM, Min Chen min.c...@citrix.com wrote: Thanks Daan. Yes, I saw that there is another thread about putting an API request for 5.0 api. Once we are done with this disabling, we will put the issues we have found with current API in that wiki page to take into consideration when we design the new API. -min On 5/14/14 12:12 AM, Daan Hoogland
Re: [DISCUSS] [PROPOSAL] Implementation of DNS Provider for Bind (for 4.5)
Thank you David. I put design documents on wiki: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Bind+and+PowerDNS+integration+by+Globo+DNSAPI. I create an issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6998 too. I look forward to hearing your feedbacks. []'s, Silvano Buback On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:50 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Silvano Nogueira Buback silv...@corp.globo.com wrote: Hi guys, I finish the first version of design document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kbPQJrBC87ZtR-t7LwHFDzAmT436ShtjwKE84FVfByM/pub . Someone could give me access to put design documents in wiki? Bellow the username of people work with Cloudstack in Globo.com and need access. snbuback silv...@corp.globo.com daniel.simoes daniel.sim...@corp.globo.com lokama - lok...@gmail.com Regards, Silvano Buback On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Silvano Buback snbub...@gmail.com wrote: Of course, I forgotten my account info: snbuback / silv...@corp.globo.com Done. --David
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
Kishan, The type of region id is Integer, not Long, so I'm wondering why it should be Long. Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com wrote: This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/ Alex, As discussed on the mailing list, ORIGINATEDREGIONUUID should be the regionId which is Long. So all the ORIGINATEDREGIONUUID references should just be ORIGINATEDREGIONID and of datatype Long. - Kishan Kavala On June 24th, 2014, 9:24 p.m. IST, Alex Ough wrote: Review request for cloudstack. By Alex Ough. *Updated June 24, 2014, 9:24 p.m.* *Repository: * cloudstack-git Description This is the review request for the core changes related with #17790 that has only the new plugin codes. Testing 1. Successfully tested real time synchronization as soon as resources are created/deleted/modified in one region. 2. Successfully tested full scans to synchronize resources that were missed during real time synchronization because of any reasons like network connection issues. 3. The tests were done manually and also automatically by randomly generating changes each region. Diffs - api/src/com/cloud/event/EventTypes.java (0fa3cd5) - api/src/com/cloud/user/AccountService.java (eac8a76) - api/src/com/cloud/user/DomainService.java (4c1f93d) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java (adda5f4) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/BaseCmd.java (ac9a208) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/CreateAccountCmd.java (50d67d9) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DeleteAccountCmd.java (5754ec5) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DisableAccountCmd.java (3e5e1d3) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/EnableAccountCmd.java (f30c985) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/LockAccountCmd.java (3c185e4) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/UpdateAccountCmd.java (a7ce74a) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/CreateDomainCmd.java (312c9ee) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/DeleteDomainCmd.java (a6d2b0b) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/UpdateDomainCmd.java (409a84d) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/AddRegionCmd.java (f6743ba) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/UpdateRegionCmd.java (b08cbbb) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/CreateUserCmd.java (8f223ac) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DeleteUserCmd.java (08ba521) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DisableUserCmd.java (c6e09ef) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/EnableUserCmd.java (d69eccf) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/LockUserCmd.java (69623d0) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/RegisterCmd.java (2090d21) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/UpdateUserCmd.java (f21e264) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/RegionResponse.java (6c74fa6) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/Region.java (df64e44) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionService.java (afefcc7) - api/test/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/test/RegionCmdTest.java (10c3d85) - client/pom.xml (29fef4f) - engine/schema/resources/META-INF/cloudstack/core/spring-engine-schema-core-daos-context.xml (2ef0d20) - engine/schema/src/com/cloud/user/AccountVO.java (0f5a044) - engine/schema/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionVO.java (608bd2b) - plugins/network-elements/juniper-contrail/test/org/apache/cloudstack/network/contrail/management/MockAccountManager.java (4136b5c) - plugins/pom.xml (b5e6a61) - plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapCreateAccountCmd.java (b753952) - plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapImportUsersCmd.java (6f7be90) - server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java (f1f0d2c) - server/src/com/cloud/api/dispatch/ParamProcessWorker.java (1592b93) - server/src/com/cloud/event/ActionEventUtils.java (2b3cfea) - server/src/com/cloud/projects/ProjectManagerImpl.java (d10c059) - server/src/com/cloud/user/AccountManager.java (194c5d2) - server/src/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImpl.java (7a889f1) - server/src/com/cloud/user/DomainManager.java (f72b18a) - server/src/com/cloud/user/DomainManagerImpl.java (fbbe0c2) - server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManager.java (6f25481) - server/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionManagerImpl.java (8910714) -
Re: [ACS4.4] i18n problems in Add Primary Storage dialog
Hi Vetri,
No problem! It happens to all of us. :)
I appreciate your efforts in making these files more i18n friendly.
Thanks for fixing the issue so quickly. That helps a lot!
Talk to you later,
Mike
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Vetrivel Chinnasamy
vetrivel.chinnas...@citrix.com wrote:
Hi Mike,
Kindly accept my apology for the issue. I have used script to identify
certain pattern of hardcoded strings and fixed them. Some exceptions like
this got escaped from my unit testing also.
I have reverted the changes as suggested and created a patch for review.
Brian/Jessica, Could you please do the needful?
Review Request #23008 https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/.
Kindly accept my apology for inconvenience caused because of this issue.
Thanks.
Regards,
Vetri
P.S: I am reviewing again the externalization code changes committed in
the past to avoid these type of issues.
*From:* Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
*Sent:* 26 June 2014 03:56
*To:* dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Vetrivel Chinnasamy
*Cc:* Brian Federle; Alena Prokharchyk; Jessica Wang
*Subject:* Re: [ACS4.4] i18n problems in Add Primary Storage dialog
By the way, what I was referring to with my proposed hack was just to fix
the two situations (SR Name-Label and Path) by hardcoding the English
back in.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Mike Tutkowski
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote:
It looks like these issues were introduced in
182c31899bb353eac66a43ca4e81117c4fd06332 by vetrivelc with regards to
externalizing hardcoded strings.
My guess is that this substitution was done in an automated fashion and
some unintended consequences of the substitution logic occurred.
vetrivelc - Any chance you could take a look at these issues and decide on
a way for us to proceed? This is in 4.4 code (first RC currently planned
for this Friday), so it would be awesome if we could resolve these quickly.
One hack would be for us to just hard code the English words back, but of
course these labels would then be incorrect in other languages (unless, of
course, by coincidence the words happened to be the same in each lang).
Thanks!
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(Path:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('label.path'+:).prepend($required);
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbUsername]').hide();
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbPassword]').hide();
@@ -15414,7 +15414,7 @@
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(Path:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('label.path'+:).prepend($required);
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbUsername]').css('display', 'inline-block');
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbPassword]').css('display', 'inline-block');
@@ -15441,7 +15441,7 @@
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(Path:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('label.path'+:).prepend($required);
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbUsername]').hide();
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbPassword]').hide();
@@ -15467,7 +15467,7 @@
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(SR
Name-Label:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('
label.SR.name'+:).prepend($required);
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbUsername]').hide();
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbPassword]').hide();
@@ -15566,7 +15566,7 @@
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(Path:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('label.path'+:).prepend($required);
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Mike Tutkowski
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote:
Hi,
I noticed a couple i18n-related issues
Re: Review Request 23008: Reverted the hardcoding fix for SR-Label: and Path: strings
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/#review46754
---
This line looks incorrect to me:
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('label.path'+:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(SR
Name-Label:).prepend($required);
I think the replaced text should be Path:.
- Mike Tutkowski
On June 26, 2014, 11:52 a.m., Vetrivel Chinnasamy wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/
---
(Updated June 26, 2014, 11:52 a.m.)
Review request for cloudstack, Brian Federle and Jessica Wang.
Repository: cloudstack-git
Description
---
Reverted the hard-coding fix for strings Path: and SR-Name Label:.
Diffs
-
ui/scripts/system.js 67e01f1
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/diff/
Testing
---
No
Thanks,
Vetrivel Chinnasamy
Re: Review Request 23008: Reverted the hardcoding fix for SR-Label: and Path: strings
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/#review46755 --- Ship it! Due to time constraints with regards to RC1 of 4.4 (tentatively planned for tomorrow), I went ahead and modified the patch per my previous comment and committed it to 4.4-forward: 9c2e6f5ed45522ff68131556028f3fb4ff91ee90 - Mike Tutkowski On June 26, 2014, 11:52 a.m., Vetrivel Chinnasamy wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/ --- (Updated June 26, 2014, 11:52 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Brian Federle and Jessica Wang. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Reverted the hard-coding fix for strings Path: and SR-Name Label:. Diffs - ui/scripts/system.js 67e01f1 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/diff/ Testing --- No Thanks, Vetrivel Chinnasamy
[ACS4.4] Please cherry-pick 9c2e6f5ed45522ff68131556028f3fb4ff91ee90
Hi Daan, Please cherry pick 9c2e6f5ed45522ff68131556028f3fb4ff91ee90. This is the i18n issue I referred to yesterday that was in the Add Primary Storage window. Thanks! -- *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*™*
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
Alex, By “huge” I’ve meant that there was a lot of repetitive hardcoded things, lot of unnecessary changes to the CS orchestration layer. If you compare a number of changes now and originally, you can see that it reduced almost twice. But lets discuss the complains about lack of initial review as its more important question. Review of the design spec should happen before you start designing/coding. As I jumped on review much later, after you’ve submitted the entire plugin code, so I I didn’t participate in “Feature Request” discussion review that might have happened earlier. And I do assume that the reviews/emails exchanges were done at that initial phase? You should have contacted the people participating in the initial phase, and ask them for the review as well. As a part of my review, I’ve made sure to cover the things I’m certain should have been changed. I’ve reviewed the feature logic as well, consulting the FS you’ve written. I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with your initial design, but asking for a second opinion from the guys who have more expertise in Regions. Kishan, please help to do the final review the Alex’s plugin design https://reviews.apache.org/r/17790 Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.commailto:alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 9:03 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.commailto:kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.commailto:ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.commailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, I understand that you have been helping a lot to make my codes to match the coding standards, but I'm not sure what you mean by the code base was unnecessary huge. The initial implementation was to support the synchronization inside the CS because this feature is missing in the current multiple region support, and most of jobs were to separate the implementation from the CS because you guys wanted me to provide it as a plugin. And I kept asking reviews for the design spec from when I published the documents with initial prototype, it took a while for you to start to review my implementation and they have been mostly about the coding standards instead of the logic itself. So I'm saying that it would have been better if there has been someone to review the design spec and the prototype from the initial phase. Again, I really appreciate your help to come this far, but it was also very painful for me. Thanks Alex Ough On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, In the beginning the code was not very well organazied, didn't match coding standarts (no use of spring, misleading names, not segregated to its own plugin), and the code base was unneccessary huge. All of the above it very hard to review and understand the code logic from the beginning and engage more people to the review. Therefore Chiradeep pointed it in his original review that the code needs to match CS standarts first, and be better organized. I helped to review the fixes, and did logic review as well after the code came into “reviewable” shape. I'm asking Kishan/Murali to look at it to see if anything is missing or incorrect in the final review, not to make you override or change everything you've already put in. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.commailto:alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 7:12 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.commailto:kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.commailto:ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.commailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, Don't get me wrong. What I'm saying is that it would have been better if you asked the review to whomever you thought was important when you started the review. Thanks Alex Ough On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, I did my best to review the code, made sure it came in shape with the CS guidelines and java code style There was no way to anticipate all the things to fix
Re: [ACS4.4] Please cherry-pick 9c2e6f5ed45522ff68131556028f3fb4ff91ee90
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Mike Tutkowski mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote: 9c2e6f5ed45522ff68131556028f3fb4ff91ee90 is in -- Daan
Cloudstack MS failover
I want to setup HA of MS with HAproxy OR Keepalived. I have MS1 DB1 installed on 10.1.1.2 MS2 DB2 installed on 10.1.1.3 also DB has master - master replication setup. Need help on this how can i setup failover for MS. Regards, Tejas
RE: [ACS4.4] i18n problems in Add Primary Storage dialog
Vetrivel,
Mike has reviewed it.
Mike,
thanks a lot!
Jessica
From: Vetrivel Chinnasamy
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 5:07 AM
To: Mike Tutkowski; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Brian Federle; Alena Prokharchyk; Jessica Wang
Subject: RE: [ACS4.4] i18n problems in Add Primary Storage dialog
Hi Mike,
Kindly accept my apology for the issue. I have used script to identify certain
pattern of hardcoded strings and fixed them. Some exceptions like this got
escaped from my unit testing also.
I have reverted the changes as suggested and created a patch for review.
Brian/Jessica, Could you please do the needful?
Review Request #23008https://reviews.apache.org/r/23008/.
Kindly accept my apology for inconvenience caused because of this issue.
Thanks.
Regards,
Vetri
P.S: I am reviewing again the externalization code changes committed in the
past to avoid these type of issues.
From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
Sent: 26 June 2014 03:56
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Vetrivel Chinnasamy
Cc: Brian Federle; Alena Prokharchyk; Jessica Wang
Subject: Re: [ACS4.4] i18n problems in Add Primary Storage dialog
By the way, what I was referring to with my proposed hack was just to fix the
two situations (SR Name-Label and Path) by hardcoding the English back in.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Mike Tutkowski
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.commailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote:
It looks like these issues were introduced in
182c31899bb353eac66a43ca4e81117c4fd06332 by vetrivelc with regards to
externalizing hardcoded strings.
My guess is that this substitution was done in an automated fashion and some
unintended consequences of the substitution logic occurred.
vetrivelc - Any chance you could take a look at these issues and decide on a
way for us to proceed? This is in 4.4 code (first RC currently planned for this
Friday), so it would be awesome if we could resolve these quickly.
One hack would be for us to just hard code the English words back, but of
course these labels would then be incorrect in other languages (unless, of
course, by coincidence the words happened to be the same in each lang).
Thanks!
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(Path:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('label.path'+:).prepend($required);
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbUsername]').hide();
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbPassword]').hide();
@@ -15414,7 +15414,7 @@
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(Path:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('label.path'+:).prepend($required);
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbUsername]').css('display', 'inline-block');
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbPassword]').css('display', 'inline-block');
@@ -15441,7 +15441,7 @@
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(Path:).prepend($required);
+
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text('label.path'+:).prepend($required);
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbUsername]').hide();
$form.find('.form-item[rel=smbPassword]').hide();
@@ -15467,7 +15467,7 @@
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').css('display', 'inline-block');
var $required =
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label span);
-
$form.find('.form-item[rel=path]').find(.name).find(label).text(SR
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
Alena, It has been reduced almost twice because a lot has been separated from the CS and moved to the plug-in not because they are 'unnecessary'. Please remember that my initial implementation was inside the CS not as a plug-in as I said in the previous email. Of course, I asked and urged the review repeatedly and you'll see the all the histories of them if you find emails using this subject, which started 10/17/13. [DISCUSS] Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions Even if I asked so many times, unfortunately, I couldn't get an actual feedback until Daan finally asked Chiradeep and you to review them, which is 3/10/14. Kishan, I posted 2 questions, so please guide me for the questions. Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, By “huge” I’ve meant that there was a lot of repetitive hardcoded things, lot of unnecessary changes to the CS orchestration layer. If you compare a number of changes now and originally, you can see that it reduced almost twice. But lets discuss the complains about lack of initial review as its more important question. Review of the design spec should happen before you start designing/coding. As I jumped on review much later, after you’ve submitted the entire plugin code, so I I didn’t participate in “Feature Request” discussion review that might have happened earlier. And I do assume that the reviews/emails exchanges were done at that initial phase? You should have contacted the people participating in the initial phase, and ask them for the review as well. As a part of my review, I’ve made sure to cover the things I’m certain should have been changed. I’ve reviewed the feature logic as well, consulting the FS you’ve written. I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with your initial design, but asking for a second opinion from the guys who have more expertise in Regions. Kishan, please help to do the final review the Alex’s plugin design https://reviews.apache.org/r/17790 Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 9:03 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, I understand that you have been helping a lot to make my codes to match the coding standards, but I'm not sure what you mean by the code base was unnecessary huge. The initial implementation was to support the synchronization inside the CS because this feature is missing in the current multiple region support, and most of jobs were to separate the implementation from the CS because you guys wanted me to provide it as a plugin. And I kept asking reviews for the design spec from when I published the documents with initial prototype, it took a while for you to start to review my implementation and they have been mostly about the coding standards instead of the logic itself. So I'm saying that it would have been better if there has been someone to review the design spec and the prototype from the initial phase. Again, I really appreciate your help to come this far, but it was also very painful for me. Thanks Alex Ough On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, In the beginning the code was not very well organazied, didn't match coding standarts (no use of spring, misleading names, not segregated to its own plugin), and the code base was unneccessary huge. All of the above it very hard to review and understand the code logic from the beginning and engage more people to the review. Therefore Chiradeep pointed it in his original review that the code needs to match CS standarts first, and be better organized. I helped to review the fixes, and did logic review as well after the code came into “reviewable” shape. I'm asking Kishan/Murali to look at it to see if anything is missing or incorrect in the final review, not to make you override or change everything you've already put in. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 7:12 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, Don't get me wrong. What I'm saying is that it would have been better if you asked the review to whomever you thought was important when you
Re: Review Request 22019: CLOUDSTACK-6732: [OVS][UI] Network Service Providers page displays two ovs providers
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/#review46775 --- Commit 6d5d48f460438c7df43e3d0e3da9bd91866c53d5 in cloudstack's branch refs/heads/4.4-forward from Gabor Apati-Nagy [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=6d5d48f ] CLOUDSTACK-6732: Fix:[OVS][UI] Network Service Providers page displays two ovs providers - ASF Subversion and Git Services On May 29, 2014, 2:16 p.m., Gabor Apati-Nagy wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/ --- (Updated May 29, 2014, 2:16 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Brian Federle and Jessica Wang. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6732 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6732 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Fixed: CLOUDSTACK-6732: [OVS][UI] Network Service Providers page displays two ovs providers Diffs - ui/scripts/system.js 67e01f1 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Gabor Apati-Nagy
Re: Review Request 22019: CLOUDSTACK-6732: [OVS][UI] Network Service Providers page displays two ovs providers
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/#review46776 --- Commit 5c36fe84b69441714c2577b40b42afaf8f65a1ce in cloudstack's branch refs/heads/master from Gabor Apati-Nagy [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=5c36fe8 ] CLOUDSTACK-6732: Fix:[OVS][UI] Network Service Providers page displays two ovs providers - ASF Subversion and Git Services On May 29, 2014, 2:16 p.m., Gabor Apati-Nagy wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/ --- (Updated May 29, 2014, 2:16 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Brian Federle and Jessica Wang. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6732 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6732 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Fixed: CLOUDSTACK-6732: [OVS][UI] Network Service Providers page displays two ovs providers Diffs - ui/scripts/system.js 67e01f1 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Gabor Apati-Nagy
Re: NetworkOrchestrator selects 2 NetworkGurus at one time....
For 4.3/4.4, I’m guessing this is the same solution. For 4.5, here’s a couple of options we could implement: 1. New isolation provider (“BrocadeVLAN” or “JuniperEXVLAN”) 2. When creating the network offering, the administrator gets to select the guru 3. New VLAN provider mechanism. From: Pradeep Cloudstack pradeepcloudst...@yahoo.commailto:pradeepcloudst...@yahoo.com Reply-To: Pradeep Cloudstack pradeepcloudst...@yahoo.commailto:pradeepcloudst...@yahoo.com Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 3:06 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.commailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com Cc: Sheng Yang sheng.y...@citrix.commailto:sheng.y...@citrix.com, Jayapal Reddy Uradi jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.commailto:jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Subject: Re: NetworkOrchestrator selects 2 NetworkGurus at one time We have a use-case where we will patch an existing 4.3 installation with our plugin. We are facing the same issue . In 4.2, we used to disable the entry for ExternalNetworkGuru in componentContext.xml as part of installing the patch. How do we do this in 4.3 (on an existing installation) ? -Pradeep From: Ritu Sabharwal rsabh...@brocade.commailto:rsabh...@brocade.com To: dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.commailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com Cc: Sheng Yang sheng.y...@citrix.commailto:sheng.y...@citrix.com; Jayapal Reddy Uradi jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.commailto:jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com; Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 12:13 AM Subject: RE: NetworkOrchestrator selects 2 NetworkGurus at one time Thanks Chiradeep and Murali for the reply! I am thinking of explicitly telling ExternalNetworkGuru to skip design when Brocade plugin is designing the network. I don't want to disable ExternalNetworkGuru from default build when Brocade plugin is not present so won't exclude it from the spring class loader. Thanks Regards, Ritu S. -Original Message- From: Murali Reddy [mailto:murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:54 PM To: Chiradeep Vittal; dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Sheng Yang; Jayapal Reddy Uradi; Alena Prokharchyk Subject: Re: NetworkOrchestrator selects 2 NetworkGurus at one time This is know design issue. Unlike service orchestration (which has prescriptive way to tell which network elements to be called for with network offerings ) there is no such logic for network design. Orchestrator just loops through all the network guru's asking to design the network which can results in one or more networks. Hugo did a cleanup [1] but I believe it was not merged as there was no consensus. There is 1-1 mapping between isolation type and Guru but In this case both Brocade Guru and ExternalNetworkGuru will attempt to design the VLAN isolated networks. One in-elegent solution is to hard code ExternalGuestNetworu guru to skip network deign when Brocade plug-in is supposed to do design the network. Other option could be exclude ExternalNetworkGuru bean from spring class loader. [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@cloudstack.apache.org/msg17344.html From: Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.commailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.commailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.commailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com Date: Wednesday, 11 June 2014 6:24 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Sheng Yang sheng.y...@citrix.commailto:sheng.y...@citrix.commailto:sheng.y...@citrix.commailto:sheng.y...@citrix.com, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.com, Jayapal Reddy Uradi jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.commailto:jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.commailto:jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.commailto:jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Subject: Re: NetworkOrchestrator selects 2 NetworkGurus at one time That is strange. Looks like a bug to me. That is because the ExternalGuestNetworkGuru returns 'true' for canHandle. From: Ritu Sabharwal rsabh...@brocade.commailto:rsabh...@brocade.commailto:rsabh...@brocade.commailto:rsabh...@brocade.com Reply-To:
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
Alex, sorry to hear that it took so long to get on the review process. The question still remains – before you started working on implementation, and posted your plugin’s code, was the FS approved/reviewed as a part of [PROPOSAL] discussion? We should never start the development until you get the input from the community on the FS and confirm that the design is valid and the feature can contribute to CS. Only after the proposal is accepted, you can request the Reviewboard ticket review. So I did assume that the [PROPOSAL] phase was finished, and the FS was validated as a part of it, when I was asked by Daan to review the Reviewboard ticket. I’ve also looked at the history. I can see that Chiradeep contributed to the design/plugin logic discussion as well as pointed to the changes that need to be done to the code structure. I helped to review the second. Lets wait for the update from Kishan. Kishan, in addition to answering Alex’s questions, please go over the plugin design once again. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.commailto:alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014 at 11:32 AM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.commailto:kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.commailto:ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.commailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, It has been reduced almost twice because a lot has been separated from the CS and moved to the plug-in not because they are 'unnecessary'. Please remember that my initial implementation was inside the CS not as a plug-in as I said in the previous email. Of course, I asked and urged the review repeatedly and you'll see the all the histories of them if you find emails using this subject, which started 10/17/13. [DISCUSS] Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions Even if I asked so many times, unfortunately, I couldn't get an actual feedback until Daan finally asked Chiradeep and you to review them, which is 3/10/14. Kishan, I posted 2 questions, so please guide me for the questions. Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, By “huge” I’ve meant that there was a lot of repetitive hardcoded things, lot of unnecessary changes to the CS orchestration layer. If you compare a number of changes now and originally, you can see that it reduced almost twice. But lets discuss the complains about lack of initial review as its more important question. Review of the design spec should happen before you start designing/coding. As I jumped on review much later, after you’ve submitted the entire plugin code, so I I didn’t participate in “Feature Request” discussion review that might have happened earlier. And I do assume that the reviews/emails exchanges were done at that initial phase? You should have contacted the people participating in the initial phase, and ask them for the review as well. As a part of my review, I’ve made sure to cover the things I’m certain should have been changed. I’ve reviewed the feature logic as well, consulting the FS you’ve written. I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with your initial design, but asking for a second opinion from the guys who have more expertise in Regions. Kishan, please help to do the final review the Alex’s plugin design https://reviews.apache.org/r/17790 Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.commailto:alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 9:03 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.commailto:kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.commailto:ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.commailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, I understand that you have been helping a lot to make my codes to match the coding standards, but I'm not sure what you mean by the code base was unnecessary huge. The initial implementation was to support the synchronization inside the CS because this feature is missing in the current multiple region support, and most of jobs were to separate the implementation from the CS because you guys wanted me to provide it as a
Re: Review Request 22019: CLOUDSTACK-6732: [OVS][UI] Network Service Providers page displays two ovs providers
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/#review46798 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Jessica Wang On May 29, 2014, 2:16 p.m., Gabor Apati-Nagy wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/ --- (Updated May 29, 2014, 2:16 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Brian Federle and Jessica Wang. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6732 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6732 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Fixed: CLOUDSTACK-6732: [OVS][UI] Network Service Providers page displays two ovs providers Diffs - ui/scripts/system.js 67e01f1 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22019/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Gabor Apati-Nagy
Re: Review Request 23084: Making the Adding primary storage form support adding primary storage to CS that is based on storage plug-ins
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23084/ --- (Updated June 26, 2014, 8:47 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Mike Wang. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Making the GUI support adding primary storage to CS that is based on storage plug-ins https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Create+GUI+to+add+primary+storage+based+on+plug-ins Diffs - client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages.properties b504a18 ui/dictionary.jsp 9026a36 ui/scripts/docs.js aad358b ui/scripts/system.js 44a08a6 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23084/diff/ Testing --- manual testing by changing GUI controls and observing the behavior. verifying that data ended up in the storage_pool table as expected. Thanks, Seifeddine JEMLI
Re: Review Request 23084: Making the Adding primary storage form support adding primary storage to CS that is based on storage plug-ins
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23084/ --- (Updated June 26, 2014, 8:49 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Mike Tutkowski. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Making the GUI support adding primary storage to CS that is based on storage plug-ins https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Create+GUI+to+add+primary+storage+based+on+plug-ins Diffs - client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages.properties b504a18 ui/dictionary.jsp 9026a36 ui/scripts/docs.js aad358b ui/scripts/system.js 44a08a6 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23084/diff/ Testing --- manual testing by changing GUI controls and observing the behavior. verifying that data ended up in the storage_pool table as expected. Thanks, Seifeddine JEMLI
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
Alena, Didn't you say that you guys already did logic review in the previous email? Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, sorry to hear that it took so long to get on the review process. The question still remains – before you started working on implementation, and posted your plugin’s code, was the FS approved/reviewed as a part of [PROPOSAL] discussion? We should never start the development until you get the input from the community on the FS and confirm that the design is valid and the feature can contribute to CS. Only after the proposal is accepted, you can request the Reviewboard ticket review. So I did assume that the [PROPOSAL] phase was finished, and the FS was validated as a part of it, when I was asked by Daan to review the Reviewboard ticket. I’ve also looked at the history. I can see that Chiradeep contributed to the design/plugin logic discussion as well as pointed to the changes that need to be done to the code structure. I helped to review the second. Lets wait for the update from Kishan. Kishan, in addition to answering Alex’s questions, please go over the plugin design once again. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014 at 11:32 AM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, It has been reduced almost twice because a lot has been separated from the CS and moved to the plug-in not because they are 'unnecessary'. Please remember that my initial implementation was inside the CS not as a plug-in as I said in the previous email. Of course, I asked and urged the review repeatedly and you'll see the all the histories of them if you find emails using this subject, which started 10/17/13. [DISCUSS] Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions Even if I asked so many times, unfortunately, I couldn't get an actual feedback until Daan finally asked Chiradeep and you to review them, which is 3/10/14. Kishan, I posted 2 questions, so please guide me for the questions. Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, By “huge” I’ve meant that there was a lot of repetitive hardcoded things, lot of unnecessary changes to the CS orchestration layer. If you compare a number of changes now and originally, you can see that it reduced almost twice. But lets discuss the complains about lack of initial review as its more important question. Review of the design spec should happen before you start designing/coding. As I jumped on review much later, after you’ve submitted the entire plugin code, so I I didn’t participate in “Feature Request” discussion review that might have happened earlier. And I do assume that the reviews/emails exchanges were done at that initial phase? You should have contacted the people participating in the initial phase, and ask them for the review as well. As a part of my review, I’ve made sure to cover the things I’m certain should have been changed. I’ve reviewed the feature logic as well, consulting the FS you’ve written. I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with your initial design, but asking for a second opinion from the guys who have more expertise in Regions. Kishan, please help to do the final review the Alex’s plugin design https://reviews.apache.org/r/17790 Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 9:03 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, I understand that you have been helping a lot to make my codes to match the coding standards, but I'm not sure what you mean by the code base was unnecessary huge. The initial implementation was to support the synchronization inside the CS because this feature is missing in the current multiple region support, and most of jobs were to separate the implementation from the CS because you guys wanted me to provide it as a plugin. And I kept asking reviews for the design spec from when I published the documents with initial prototype, it took a while for you to start to review my implementation and they have been mostly about the coding standards instead of the logic itself. So I'm saying that it
[VMWARE][ACS430] Traffic Shaping
Are we enabling traffic shaping on vmware standard switches/portgroups and if so, how do we change the behavior or turn it off complete?
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
I did logic review according to the FS assuming that the FS (and the design described there) was approved on the [PROPOSAL] stage, BEFORE the code was put it to the review board. Was it approved at that stage? Alex, the feature is not small, and considering that it raised so many questions and arguing, I would really like to get a final design/logic review + “ship it” from people having expertise on the topic, and/or who originally participated in review/discussion: Chiradeep, Kishan, Murail. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.commailto:alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014 at 1:53 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.commailto:kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.commailto:ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.commailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, Didn't you say that you guys already did logic review in the previous email? Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, sorry to hear that it took so long to get on the review process. The question still remains – before you started working on implementation, and posted your plugin’s code, was the FS approved/reviewed as a part of [PROPOSAL] discussion? We should never start the development until you get the input from the community on the FS and confirm that the design is valid and the feature can contribute to CS. Only after the proposal is accepted, you can request the Reviewboard ticket review. So I did assume that the [PROPOSAL] phase was finished, and the FS was validated as a part of it, when I was asked by Daan to review the Reviewboard ticket. I’ve also looked at the history. I can see that Chiradeep contributed to the design/plugin logic discussion as well as pointed to the changes that need to be done to the code structure. I helped to review the second. Lets wait for the update from Kishan. Kishan, in addition to answering Alex’s questions, please go over the plugin design once again. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.commailto:alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014 at 11:32 AM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.commailto:kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.commailto:murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.commailto:ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.commailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, It has been reduced almost twice because a lot has been separated from the CS and moved to the plug-in not because they are 'unnecessary'. Please remember that my initial implementation was inside the CS not as a plug-in as I said in the previous email. Of course, I asked and urged the review repeatedly and you'll see the all the histories of them if you find emails using this subject, which started 10/17/13. [DISCUSS] Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions Even if I asked so many times, unfortunately, I couldn't get an actual feedback until Daan finally asked Chiradeep and you to review them, which is 3/10/14. Kishan, I posted 2 questions, so please guide me for the questions. Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.commailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, By “huge” I’ve meant that there was a lot of repetitive hardcoded things, lot of unnecessary changes to the CS orchestration layer. If you compare a number of changes now and originally, you can see that it reduced almost twice. But lets discuss the complains about lack of initial review as its more important question. Review of the design spec should happen before you start designing/coding. As I jumped on review much later, after you’ve submitted the entire plugin code, so I I didn’t participate in “Feature Request” discussion review that might have happened earlier. And I do assume that the reviews/emails exchanges were done at that initial phase? You should have contacted the people participating in the initial phase, and ask them for the review as well. As a part of my review, I’ve made sure to cover the things I’m certain should have been changed. I’ve reviewed the feature logic as well,
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
Sounds like it goes back to what I said I wish they have been involved more actively from the start. Thanks but really making me tired. Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: I did logic review according to the FS assuming that the FS (and the design described there) was approved on the [PROPOSAL] stage, BEFORE the code was put it to the review board. Was it approved at that stage? Alex, the feature is not small, and considering that it raised so many questions and arguing, I would really like to get a final design/logic review + “ship it” from people having expertise on the topic, and/or who originally participated in review/discussion: Chiradeep, Kishan, Murail. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014 at 1:53 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, Didn't you say that you guys already did logic review in the previous email? Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, sorry to hear that it took so long to get on the review process. The question still remains – before you started working on implementation, and posted your plugin’s code, was the FS approved/reviewed as a part of [PROPOSAL] discussion? We should never start the development until you get the input from the community on the FS and confirm that the design is valid and the feature can contribute to CS. Only after the proposal is accepted, you can request the Reviewboard ticket review. So I did assume that the [PROPOSAL] phase was finished, and the FS was validated as a part of it, when I was asked by Daan to review the Reviewboard ticket. I’ve also looked at the history. I can see that Chiradeep contributed to the design/plugin logic discussion as well as pointed to the changes that need to be done to the code structure. I helped to review the second. Lets wait for the update from Kishan. Kishan, in addition to answering Alex’s questions, please go over the plugin design once again. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014 at 11:32 AM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, It has been reduced almost twice because a lot has been separated from the CS and moved to the plug-in not because they are 'unnecessary'. Please remember that my initial implementation was inside the CS not as a plug-in as I said in the previous email. Of course, I asked and urged the review repeatedly and you'll see the all the histories of them if you find emails using this subject, which started 10/17/13. [DISCUSS] Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions Even if I asked so many times, unfortunately, I couldn't get an actual feedback until Daan finally asked Chiradeep and you to review them, which is 3/10/14. Kishan, I posted 2 questions, so please guide me for the questions. Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, By “huge” I’ve meant that there was a lot of repetitive hardcoded things, lot of unnecessary changes to the CS orchestration layer. If you compare a number of changes now and originally, you can see that it reduced almost twice. But lets discuss the complains about lack of initial review as its more important question. Review of the design spec should happen before you start designing/coding. As I jumped on review much later, after you’ve submitted the entire plugin code, so I I didn’t participate in “Feature Request” discussion review that might have happened earlier. And I do assume that the reviews/emails exchanges were done at that initial phase? You should have contacted the people participating in the initial phase, and ask them for the review as well. As a part of my review, I’ve made sure to cover the things I’m certain should have been changed. I’ve reviewed the feature logic as well, consulting the FS you’ve written. I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with your initial design, but asking for a second opinion from the guys who have more expertise in Regions. Kishan, please help to do the final review the Alex’s plugin design
[ISSUE] can not parse [10.1.1.0] error while creating Guest Network for CIDR
Hi, I am trying to create a guest network for a network offering. I am giving in all the values and when I give IPv6 cidr value to 10.1.10/23 I get error on UI. can not parse [10.1.1.0]. I tried this with 4.3 and it was workin. It does not work with master branch codebase. Please let me know what is the change in the format. Thanks Regards, Ritu S.
Re: [ISSUE] can not parse [10.1.1.0] error while creating Guest Network for CIDR
H Ritu, Are you sure you entered 10.1.10/23? it seems to me it would have to be 10.1.10.0/23. and did you enter it in the field for IPv6? this is an ipv4 address format Daan On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Ritu Sabharwal rsabh...@brocade.com wrote: Hi, I am trying to create a guest network for a network offering. I am giving in all the values and when I give IPv6 cidr value to 10.1.10/23 I get error on UI. can not parse [10.1.1.0]. I tried this with 4.3 and it was workin. It does not work with master branch codebase. Please let me know what is the change in the format. Thanks Regards, Ritu S. -- Daan
Re: [ISSUE] can not parse [10.1.1.0] error while creating Guest Network for CIDR
PS Don't know of a format change. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: H Ritu, Are you sure you entered 10.1.10/23? it seems to me it would have to be 10.1.10.0/23. and did you enter it in the field for IPv6? this is an ipv4 address format Daan On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Ritu Sabharwal rsabh...@brocade.com wrote: Hi, I am trying to create a guest network for a network offering. I am giving in all the values and when I give IPv6 cidr value to 10.1.10/23 I get error on UI. can not parse [10.1.1.0]. I tried this with 4.3 and it was workin. It does not work with master branch codebase. Please let me know what is the change in the format. Thanks Regards, Ritu S. -- Daan -- Daan
Re: [ISSUE] can not parse [10.1.1.0] error while creating Guest Network for CIDR
that would be strange. It is not a IPv6 cidr. It is IPv4. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Ritu Sabharwal rsabh...@brocade.com wrote: Sorry for the typo in earlier mail. I gave 10.1.10.1/23 in the IPv6 CIDR field and get an error can not parse [10.1.10.1]. This was working with 4.3 Ritu. -Original Message- From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:47 PM To: dev Subject: Re: [ISSUE] can not parse [10.1.1.0] error while creating Guest Network for CIDR PS Don't know of a format change. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: H Ritu, Are you sure you entered 10.1.10/23? it seems to me it would have to be 10.1.10.0/23. and did you enter it in the field for IPv6? this is an ipv4 address format Daan On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Ritu Sabharwal rsabh...@brocade.com wrote: Hi, I am trying to create a guest network for a network offering. I am giving in all the values and when I give IPv6 cidr value to 10.1.10/23 I get error on UI. can not parse [10.1.1.0]. I tried this with 4.3 and it was workin. It does not work with master branch codebase. Please let me know what is the change in the format. Thanks Regards, Ritu S. -- Daan -- Daan -- Daan
Re: Review Request 22863: CLOUDSTACK-6823 : First code drop for Brocade Network plugin to orchestrate Brocade VDX switches for L2 connectivity.
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22863/ --- (Updated June 26, 2014, 10:25 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack. Changes --- Fixed the issues as provided in review comments. Uploaded new diff file with changes and patch file for Brocade functionality code. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6823 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6823 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- First code drop for Brocade Network plugin to orchestrate Brocade VDX switches for L2 connectivity. Please create a new branch for Brocade plugin. Diffs (updated) - api/src/com/cloud/network/Network.java 885bffe api/src/com/cloud/network/Networks.java 1e4d229 api/src/com/cloud/network/PhysicalNetwork.java 8cc214e client/pom.xml 29fef4f plugins/pom.xml b5e6a61 setup/db/db/schema-440to450.sql 77445a9 ui/scripts/system.js 9a98a5c Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22863/diff/ Testing --- • Create an isolated network; verify that the port-profile is created on the Brocade switch. • Attach a VM to the network; verify that the VMs MAC address is associated with the port profile of the network on the Brocade switch. • Delete VMs for an isolated network; verify that the VMs MAC address is disassociated with the port profile of the network on the Brocade switch. • Delete the isolated network; verify that the port-profile is deleted from the Brocade switch. File Attachments (updated) Diff for the existing cloudstack code https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2014/06/23/8fc3cfb1-7a21-4714-98f3-6514cf54ba84__diff Patch file for Brocade functionality code https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2014/06/26/92bb0014-a7b7-4f0b-97c9-018d615b658a__brocade-vcs.patch Thanks, Ritu Sabharwal
Re: Review Request 21817: [UI] New Zones tab for Templates and ISOs
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21817/#review46807 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Jessica Wang On May 22, 2014, 4:52 p.m., Gabor Apati-Nagy wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21817/ --- (Updated May 22, 2014, 4:52 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Jessica Wang. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6565 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6565 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- New diff with improved ui layout Diffs - ui/css/cloudstack3.css cb9fa35 ui/dictionary.jsp 9cc030a ui/scripts/templates.js 67cc2fb Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21817/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Gabor Apati-Nagy
Review Request 23098: Updated Marvin code to support more properties.
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23098/ --- Review request for cloudstack and Mike Tutkowski. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Building automated integration tests that needed additional properties added to Marvin code. Diffs - tools/marvin/marvin/integration/lib/base.py 95b7fe9 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23098/diff/ Testing --- Ran new code against my integration tests, and it was successful. Thanks, Vania Xu
Re: [VMWARE][ACS430] Traffic Shaping
Ilya, Isn't this tied into the network/service offering? (it is for other HVs, defaults to 200 Mbps afaik) Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - From: ilya musayev ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Sent: Thursday, 26 June, 2014 9:55:09 PM Subject: [VMWARE][ACS430] Traffic Shaping Are we enabling traffic shaping on vmware standard switches/portgroups and if so, how do we change the behavior or turn it off complete?
RE: [VMWARE][ACS430] Traffic Shaping
Yes, it's tied to networking offering. Implemented network settings follows the network offering. Regards, Sateesh -Original Message- From: Nux! [mailto:n...@li.nux.ro] Sent: 27 June 2014 05:32 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [VMWARE][ACS430] Traffic Shaping Ilya, Isn't this tied into the network/service offering? (it is for other HVs, defaults to 200 Mbps afaik) Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - From: ilya musayev ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Sent: Thursday, 26 June, 2014 9:55:09 PM Subject: [VMWARE][ACS430] Traffic Shaping Are we enabling traffic shaping on vmware standard switches/portgroups and if so, how do we change the behavior or turn it off complete?
Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
All, I apologize for joining this conversation late. I understand that this patch was submitted back in February. Around this time, my family had a significant medical event, and I was disengaged from all work activities — missing the original conversation. Reading through the specification, and briefly reviewing the code, I would like to understand the following assumptions/design decisions: 1. Why aren’t projects being sync’ed? It seems very likely that users would want to have projects span data centers for redundancy/DR purposes. 2. Why aren’t events being sync’ed? I can imagine a number of scenarios where I would want to examine the operation of an logical application or system across both regions. Without the sync of event data, I would be forced to either perform that interleave visually with two browser tabs or dump the data into another datastore to be merged. 3. Why isn’t template metadata being sync’ed? When spanning an application/system across regions, it would seem to follow that I would want to use the same templates. 4. How does this design deal with modifications to a record in two or more regions during a network partition? 5. Given that messages can/will be processed out of order, how is referential integrity maintained when a parent and a set of children are created (e.g. creation of a new account and a set of users rapidly through the API)? 6. Is RabbitMQ being relied upon to provide partition tolerance? 7. Is there a back pressure mechanism to throttle the full sync operation when the database/management server is under heavy load? Finally, I would like to understand why we are taking on multi-datacenter data replication in CloudStack, and not deferring to underlying datastore. Speaking as someone whose $dayjob involves delivering such a system (at Basho for Riak), it is a very hard thing to get right (there literally thousands of corner cases). The design document does not speak to this decision, and I would like understand how CloudStack could not leverage existing, mature mechanisms at the datastore-level. I apologize if some of these questions have been answered already. I attempt to look back in the archives, but given the span of this conversation, it was difficult to piece together retroactively. Thanks, -John On June 26, 2014 at 5:34:31 PM, Alex Ough (alex.o...@sungardas.com) wrote: Sounds like it goes back to what I said I wish they have been involved more actively from the start. Thanks but really making me tired. Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: I did logic review according to the FS assuming that the FS (and the design described there) was approved on the [PROPOSAL] stage, BEFORE the code was put it to the review board. Was it approved at that stage? Alex, the feature is not small, and considering that it raised so many questions and arguing, I would really like to get a final design/logic review + “ship it” from people having expertise on the topic, and/or who originally participated in review/discussion: Chiradeep, Kishan, Murail. Thank you, Alena. From: Alex Ough alex.o...@sungardas.com Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014 at 1:53 PM To: Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com Cc: Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com, dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.org, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com, Ram Ganesh ram.gan...@citrix.com, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Alena, Didn't you say that you guys already did logic review in the previous email? Thanks Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote: Alex, sorry to hear that it took so long to get on the review process. The question still remains – before you started working on implementation, and posted your plugin’s code, was the FS approved/reviewed as a part of [PROPOSAL] discussion? We should never start the development until you get the input from the community on the FS and confirm that the design is valid and the feature can contribute to CS. Only after the proposal is accepted, you can request the Reviewboard ticket review. So I did assume that the [PROPOSAL] phase was finished, and the FS was validated as a part of it, when I was asked by Daan to review the Reviewboard ticket. I’ve also looked at the history. I can see that Chiradeep contributed to the design/plugin logic discussion as well as pointed to the changes that need to be done to the code structure. I helped to review the second. Lets wait for the update from Kishan. Kishan, in addition to answering Alex’s questions, please go over the plugin design once again. Thank you,
RE: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes)
Alex, You are correct. It should be Integer and not Long. -Original Message- From: Alex Ough [mailto:alex.o...@sungardas.com] Sent: Thursday, 26 June 2014 8:09 PM To: Kishan Kavala Cc: cloudstack Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Sync Up Among Multiple Regions (Core Changes) Kishan, The type of region id is Integer, not Long, so I'm wondering why it should be Long. Alex Ough On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Kishan Kavala kishan.kav...@citrix.com wrote: This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/ Alex, As discussed on the mailing list, ORIGINATEDREGIONUUID should be the regionId which is Long. So all the ORIGINATEDREGIONUUID references should just be ORIGINATEDREGIONID and of datatype Long. - Kishan Kavala On June 24th, 2014, 9:24 p.m. IST, Alex Ough wrote: Review request for cloudstack. By Alex Ough. *Updated June 24, 2014, 9:24 p.m.* *Repository: * cloudstack-git Description This is the review request for the core changes related with #17790 that has only the new plugin codes. Testing 1. Successfully tested real time synchronization as soon as resources are created/deleted/modified in one region. 2. Successfully tested full scans to synchronize resources that were missed during real time synchronization because of any reasons like network connection issues. 3. The tests were done manually and also automatically by randomly generating changes each region. Diffs - api/src/com/cloud/event/EventTypes.java (0fa3cd5) - api/src/com/cloud/user/AccountService.java (eac8a76) - api/src/com/cloud/user/DomainService.java (4c1f93d) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java (adda5f4) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/BaseCmd.java (ac9a208) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/CreateAccount Cmd.java (50d67d9) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DeleteAccount Cmd.java (5754ec5) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/DisableAccount Cmd.java (3e5e1d3) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/EnableAccount Cmd.java (f30c985) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/LockAccountCm d.java (3c185e4) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/account/UpdateAccount Cmd.java (a7ce74a) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/CreateDomainC md.java (312c9ee) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/DeleteDomainC md.java (a6d2b0b) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/domain/UpdateDomain Cmd.java (409a84d) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/AddRegionCmd.j ava (f6743ba) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/region/UpdateRegionC md.java (b08cbbb) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/CreateUserCmd.jav a (8f223ac) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DeleteUserCmd.jav a (08ba521) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/DisableUserCmd.ja va (c6e09ef) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/EnableUserCmd.jav a (d69eccf) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/LockUserCmd.java (69623d0) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/RegisterCmd.java (2090d21) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/user/UpdateUserCmd.ja va (f21e264) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/RegionResponse.java (6c74fa6) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/Region.java (df64e44) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionService.java (afefcc7) - api/test/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/test/RegionCmdTest.java (10c3d85) - client/pom.xml (29fef4f) - engine/schema/resources/META-INF/cloudstack/core/spring-engine- schema-core-daos-context.xml (2ef0d20) - engine/schema/src/com/cloud/user/AccountVO.java (0f5a044) - engine/schema/src/org/apache/cloudstack/region/RegionVO.java (608bd2b) - plugins/network-elements/juniper- contrail/test/org/apache/cloudstack/network/contrail/management/MockAcc ountManager.java (4136b5c) - plugins/pom.xml (b5e6a61) - plugins/user- authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapCreateAcc ountCmd.java (b753952) - plugins/user- authenticators/ldap/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/LdapImportUs ersCmd.java (6f7be90) - server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java (f1f0d2c) - server/src/com/cloud/api/dispatch/ParamProcessWorker.java (1592b93) - server/src/com/cloud/event/ActionEventUtils.java (2b3cfea) - server/src/com/cloud/projects/ProjectManagerImpl.java (d10c059) -
Re: Cloudstack MS failover
http://cloudstack.apache.org/docs/en-US/Apache_CloudStack/4.1.0/html/Instal lation_Guide/management-server-install-flow.html Section 4.5.7 has instructions on adding additional MS. -abhi On 26/06/14 10:55 pm, Tejas Gadaria refond.g...@gmail.com wrote: I want to setup HA of MS with HAproxy OR Keepalived. I have MS1 DB1 installed on 10.1.1.2 MS2 DB2 installed on 10.1.1.3 also DB has master - master replication setup. Need help on this how can i setup failover for MS. Regards, Tejas
Re: Review Request 22717: refactor StoragePoolAllocator#filter logic
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22717/#review46838 --- I first had a chance to run this patch through a sophisticated test tonight and noticed an issue with zone-wide primary storage that's based on the iSCSI protocol. This patch leads to iSCSI storage being filtered out for ROOT volumes, which is a legitimate use case in my scenario. As such, I had to return the filter method to the ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator class. I left in the other modification to the AbstractStoragePoolAllocator. - Mike Tutkowski On June 18, 2014, 12:10 a.m., Yoshikazu Nojima wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22717/ --- (Updated June 18, 2014, 12:10 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Mike Tutkowski and Prachi Damle. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- refactor StoragePoolAllocator#filter logic to enable hypervisor type check, storage type check for root volume and avoid list check, and to support IOPS capacity control in a cluster wide storage pool and a local storage pool. Diffs - engine/storage/src/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/allocator/AbstractStoragePoolAllocator.java ddbb5a4 engine/storage/src/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/allocator/ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator.java 8fb9c8d Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22717/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Yoshikazu Nojima
Re: Review Request 23084: Making the Adding primary storage form support adding primary storage to CS that is based on storage plug-ins
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23084/#review46839 --- Ship it! Committed the changes in 9a27f201b02fe33cdba1dcca7da63497b323a874 - Mike Tutkowski On June 26, 2014, 2:49 p.m., Seifeddine JEMLI wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23084/ --- (Updated June 26, 2014, 2:49 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Mike Tutkowski. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Making the GUI support adding primary storage to CS that is based on storage plug-ins https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Create+GUI+to+add+primary+storage+based+on+plug-ins Diffs - client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages.properties b504a18 ui/dictionary.jsp 9026a36 ui/scripts/docs.js aad358b ui/scripts/system.js 44a08a6 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23084/diff/ Testing --- manual testing by changing GUI controls and observing the behavior. verifying that data ended up in the storage_pool table as expected. Thanks, Seifeddine JEMLI
