Re: Switching to public IP

[Hean Seng]

there is Security Group also.

On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 12:06 AM Fariborz Navidan 
wrote:

> Dio security groups are also apply for public IP networking?
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 5:33 PM Hean Seng  wrote:
>
> > You can deliver this via Advance zone .  This available earlier  then
> 4.15.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:38 PM Fariborz Navidan 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I am using security group enabled guest network Ips as public IP to
> > provide
> > > internet connectivity for VM. I have now upgraded to 4.15 and I see
> > public
> > > IP provisioning has been added to UI, Can I convert guest IPs to public
> > IPs
> > > and use Guest network to provide private network between VMs and public
> > IPs
> > > to provide internet connectivity. So each VM can have separate private
> > and
> > > public networking? If yes, how should I proceed?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hean Seng
> >
>


-- 
Regards,
Hean Seng

Re: [DISCUSS] Terraform CloudStack provider

[Rohit Yadav]

Hi Wido, Will, PL, all,

I think I can setup a repository and request ASF infra (who prefers a JIRA 
ticket) to enable PR/issue on it, anybody has an objection to a new 
apache/cloudstack-terraform repo to maintain the provider plugin?


Regards.


From: Will Stevens 
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 19:49
To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org 
Cc: users ; Rohit Yadav 
; Niclas Lindblom ; 
Pierre-Luc Dion 
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Terraform CloudStack provider

Hey PLD,
You may want to tune into this. I think you may be maintaining a fork based on 
this code, but I am not positive.

On Fri., Jan. 29, 2021, 6:07 a.m. Wido den Hollander, 
mailto:w...@widodh.nl>> wrote:


On 28/01/2021 10:55, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Agree we can ask that.
>

Is infra from ASF the place to ask this?

Wido

>
> Regards.
>
> 
> From: Wido den Hollander mailto:w...@widodh.nl>>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 15:35
> To: Niclas Lindblom 
> mailto:niclas_lindb...@icloud.com>>; 
> users@cloudstack.apache.org 
> mailto:users@cloudstack.apache.org>>
> Cc: d...@cloudstack.apache.org 
> mailto:d...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Terraform CloudStack provider
>
>
>
> On 1/27/21 12:18 AM, Niclas Lindblom wrote:
>> I can confirm that the Terraform plugin is working if it is already 
>> installed, since it was archived it no longer automatically downloads when 
>> applying unless manually installed.
>>
>>  From the Hashicorp website, it appears it was archived when they moved all 
>> plugins to their registry and needs an owner and an email to Hashicorp to be 
>> moved into to the registry and supported again when running Terraform. I use 
>> it regularly but haven’t got the technical skills to maintain the code so 
>> been hoping this would be resolved.
>>
>
> I mailed Hashicorp to ask about this:
>
> "Thanks for reaching out. The provider was archived because we launched
> the Terraform Registry last year which allows vendors to host and
> publish their own providers. We'd be happy to work with you to transfer
> the repository over to a CloudStack Github organization where you can
> build and publish releases to the registry.
>
> We'd also like to have CloudStack join our Technology partnership
> program so I can mark your Terraform provider as verified."
>
> So I think we don't need to do much technology-wise.
>
> I don't use Terraform and don't have a major stake in it, but I would
> hate to see the Provider being removed from Terraform.
>
> Should we request https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-terraform at
> infra and then host the Provider there?
>
> Wido
>
>> Niclas
>>
>>
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 3 London Bridge Street,  3rd floor, News Building, London  SE1 9SGUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
3 London Bridge Street,  3rd floor, News Building, London  SE1 9SGUK
@shapeblue
  
 

> On 26 Jan 2021, at 18:33, 
> christian.nieph...@zv.fraunhofer.de
>  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
 On 26. Jan 2021, at 10:45, Wido den Hollander 
 mailto:w...@widodh.nl>> wrote:



 On 1/26/21 10:40 AM, 
 christian.nieph...@zv.fraunhofer.de
  wrote:
> On 25. Jan 2021, at 12:40, Abhishek Kumar 
> mailto:abhishek.ku...@shapeblue.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Terraform CoudStack provider by Hashicorp is archived here 
>> https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-cloudstack
>>
>> Is anyone using or maintaining it?
>
> We are also using it heavily and are somewhat worried about the module 
> being archived.

 Agreed. But do we know why this has been done? What needs to be done to
 un-archive it?

 If it's just a matter of some love and attention we can maybe arrange
 something.

 Is it technically broken or just abandoned?
>>>
>>> This is just an educated guess, but given that we're not experiencing any 
>>> technical issues, I believe it has just been abandoned.
>>>
>>> Christian
>>>
>>>

 Wido

>
>> We're aware of Ansible CloudStack module 
>> (https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/scenario_guides/guide_cloudstack.html)
>>  but are there any other alternatives of Terraform that you may be using 
>> with CloudStack?
>
> The ansible module is working quite well. However, one of the advantage 
> of terraform imho is that one can easily destroy defined infrastructure 
> with one command, while with ansible 'the destrcution' needs to be 
> implemented in the playbook. Another advantage is that (at least) Gitlab 
> can now maintain terraform states, which quite nicely supports GitOps 
> approaches.
>
> Cheers, Christian
>
>>
>> 

Re: Switching to public IP

[Fariborz Navidan]

Dio security groups are also apply for public IP networking?

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 5:33 PM Hean Seng  wrote:

> You can deliver this via Advance zone .  This available earlier  then 4.15.
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:38 PM Fariborz Navidan 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I am using security group enabled guest network Ips as public IP to
> provide
> > internet connectivity for VM. I have now upgraded to 4.15 and I see
> public
> > IP provisioning has been added to UI, Can I convert guest IPs to public
> IPs
> > and use Guest network to provide private network between VMs and public
> IPs
> > to provide internet connectivity. So each VM can have separate private
> and
> > public networking? If yes, how should I proceed?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hean Seng
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Terraform CloudStack provider

[Will Stevens]

Hey PLD,
You may want to tune into this. I think you may be maintaining a fork based
on this code, but I am not positive.

On Fri., Jan. 29, 2021, 6:07 a.m. Wido den Hollander, 
wrote:

>
>
> On 28/01/2021 10:55, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > Agree we can ask that.
> >
>
> Is infra from ASF the place to ask this?
>
> Wido
>
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> > 
> > From: Wido den Hollander 
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 15:35
> > To: Niclas Lindblom ;
> users@cloudstack.apache.org 
> > Cc: d...@cloudstack.apache.org 
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Terraform CloudStack provider
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1/27/21 12:18 AM, Niclas Lindblom wrote:
> >> I can confirm that the Terraform plugin is working if it is already
> installed, since it was archived it no longer automatically downloads when
> applying unless manually installed.
> >>
> >>  From the Hashicorp website, it appears it was archived when they moved
> all plugins to their registry and needs an owner and an email to Hashicorp
> to be moved into to the registry and supported again when running
> Terraform. I use it regularly but haven’t got the technical skills to
> maintain the code so been hoping this would be resolved.
> >>
> >
> > I mailed Hashicorp to ask about this:
> >
> > "Thanks for reaching out. The provider was archived because we launched
> > the Terraform Registry last year which allows vendors to host and
> > publish their own providers. We'd be happy to work with you to transfer
> > the repository over to a CloudStack Github organization where you can
> > build and publish releases to the registry.
> >
> > We'd also like to have CloudStack join our Technology partnership
> > program so I can mark your Terraform provider as verified."
> >
> > So I think we don't need to do much technology-wise.
> >
> > I don't use Terraform and don't have a major stake in it, but I would
> > hate to see the Provider being removed from Terraform.
> >
> > Should we request https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-terraform at
> > infra and then host the Provider there?
> >
> > Wido
> >
> >> Niclas
> >>
> >>
> > rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> > www.shapeblue.com
> > 3 London Bridge Street,  3rd floor, News Building, London  SE1 9SGUK
> > @shapeblue
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 26 Jan 2021, at 18:33, christian.nieph...@zv.fraunhofer.de wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
>  On 26. Jan 2021, at 10:45, Wido den Hollander  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>  On 1/26/21 10:40 AM, christian.nieph...@zv.fraunhofer.de wrote:
> > On 25. Jan 2021, at 12:40, Abhishek Kumar <
> abhishek.ku...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Terraform CoudStack provider by Hashicorp is archived here
> https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-cloudstack
> >>
> >> Is anyone using or maintaining it?
> >
> > We are also using it heavily and are somewhat worried about the
> module being archived.
> 
>  Agreed. But do we know why this has been done? What needs to be done
> to
>  un-archive it?
> 
>  If it's just a matter of some love and attention we can maybe arrange
>  something.
> 
>  Is it technically broken or just abandoned?
> >>>
> >>> This is just an educated guess, but given that we're not experiencing
> any technical issues, I believe it has just been abandoned.
> >>>
> >>> Christian
> >>>
> >>>
> 
>  Wido
> 
> >
> >> We're aware of Ansible CloudStack module (
> https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/scenario_guides/guide_cloudstack.html)
> but are there any other alternatives of Terraform that you may be using
> with CloudStack?
> >
> > The ansible module is working quite well. However, one of the
> advantage of terraform imho is that one can easily destroy defined
> infrastructure with one command, while with ansible 'the destrcution' needs
> to be implemented in the playbook. Another advantage is that (at least)
> Gitlab can now maintain terraform states, which quite nicely supports
> GitOps approaches.
> >
> > Cheers, Christian
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Abhishek
> >>
> >> abhishek.ku...@shapeblue.com
> >> www.shapeblue.com
> >> 3 London Bridge Street,  3rd floor, News Building, London  SE1 9SGUK
> >> @shapeblue
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

Re: Switching to public IP

[Hean Seng]

You can deliver this via Advance zone .  This available earlier  then 4.15.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:38 PM Fariborz Navidan 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I am using security group enabled guest network Ips as public IP to provide
> internet connectivity for VM. I have now upgraded to 4.15 and I see public
> IP provisioning has been added to UI, Can I convert guest IPs to public IPs
> and use Guest network to provide private network between VMs and public IPs
> to provide internet connectivity. So each VM can have separate private and
> public networking? If yes, how should I proceed?
>
> Thanks
>


-- 
Regards,
Hean Seng

Switching to public IP

[Fariborz Navidan]

Hi All,

I am using security group enabled guest network Ips as public IP to provide
internet connectivity for VM. I have now upgraded to 4.15 and I see public
IP provisioning has been added to UI, Can I convert guest IPs to public IPs
and use Guest network to provide private network between VMs and public IPs
to provide internet connectivity. So each VM can have separate private and
public networking? If yes, how should I proceed?

Thanks

Re: [DISCUSS] Terraform CloudStack provider

[Wido den Hollander]

On 28/01/2021 10:55, Rohit Yadav wrote:

Agree we can ask that.



Is infra from ASF the place to ask this?

Wido



Regards.


From: Wido den Hollander 
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 15:35
To: Niclas Lindblom ; users@cloudstack.apache.org 

Cc: d...@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Terraform CloudStack provider



On 1/27/21 12:18 AM, Niclas Lindblom wrote:

I can confirm that the Terraform plugin is working if it is already installed, 
since it was archived it no longer automatically downloads when applying unless 
manually installed.

 From the Hashicorp website, it appears it was archived when they moved all 
plugins to their registry and needs an owner and an email to Hashicorp to be 
moved into to the registry and supported again when running Terraform. I use it 
regularly but haven’t got the technical skills to maintain the code so been 
hoping this would be resolved.



I mailed Hashicorp to ask about this:

"Thanks for reaching out. The provider was archived because we launched
the Terraform Registry last year which allows vendors to host and
publish their own providers. We'd be happy to work with you to transfer
the repository over to a CloudStack Github organization where you can
build and publish releases to the registry.

We'd also like to have CloudStack join our Technology partnership
program so I can mark your Terraform provider as verified."

So I think we don't need to do much technology-wise.

I don't use Terraform and don't have a major stake in it, but I would
hate to see the Provider being removed from Terraform.

Should we request https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-terraform at
infra and then host the Provider there?

Wido


Niclas



rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
3 London Bridge Street,  3rd floor, News Building, London  SE1 9SGUK
@shapeblue
   
  


On 26 Jan 2021, at 18:33, christian.nieph...@zv.fraunhofer.de wrote:





On 26. Jan 2021, at 10:45, Wido den Hollander  wrote:



On 1/26/21 10:40 AM, christian.nieph...@zv.fraunhofer.de wrote:

On 25. Jan 2021, at 12:40, Abhishek Kumar  wrote:


Hi all,

Terraform CoudStack provider by Hashicorp is archived here 
https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-cloudstack

Is anyone using or maintaining it?


We are also using it heavily and are somewhat worried about the module being 
archived.


Agreed. But do we know why this has been done? What needs to be done to
un-archive it?

If it's just a matter of some love and attention we can maybe arrange
something.

Is it technically broken or just abandoned?


This is just an educated guess, but given that we're not experiencing any 
technical issues, I believe it has just been abandoned.

Christian




Wido




We're aware of Ansible CloudStack module 
(https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/scenario_guides/guide_cloudstack.html) 
but are there any other alternatives of Terraform that you may be using with 
CloudStack?


The ansible module is working quite well. However, one of the advantage of 
terraform imho is that one can easily destroy defined infrastructure with one 
command, while with ansible 'the destrcution' needs to be implemented in the 
playbook. Another advantage is that (at least) Gitlab can now maintain 
terraform states, which quite nicely supports GitOps approaches.

Cheers, Christian



Regards,
Abhishek

abhishek.ku...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
3 London Bridge Street,  3rd floor, News Building, London  SE1 9SGUK
@shapeblue