Re: any qcow2 pfsense image public available?
Thanks everybody!
Regards
On 30 Mar 2024 at 1:54 PM -0500, Wei ZHOU , wrote:
> I have built some pfsense templates in the development of VNF integration.
> Just follow the steps, you should be able to create pfsense templates in 30
> minutes.
>
> You can deploy VNF appliances with vnf nics in multiple VPC tiers.
>
> -Wei
>
> On Saturday, March 30, 2024, Ricardo Pertuz
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for your prompt reply, this tutorial allow deploy a pfsense vnf
> > template into a VPC deployment? can I have with 3 tiers?
> >
> >
> > Atte,
> >
> > Ricardo Pertuz
> >
> >
> > On 30 Mar 2024 at 11:39 AM -0500, Jayanth Babu A
> > ,
> > wrote:
> > > Not sure if I know anyone who does it anymore. I still see that creating
> > a template from ISO is a safe bet [1] though you mentioned that you'd want
> > to skip them.
> > >
> > > [1] https://www.shapeblue.com/vnf-appliance-integration-deep-dive/
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jayanth
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Ricardo Pertuz
> > > Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2024 10:01:00 pm
> > > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: any qcow2 pfsense image public available?
> > >
> > > Hi community
> > >
> > > Is there any qcow2 pfsense image for VNF public available to do a POC?
> > We want to skip the ISO steps
> > >
> > > Regards!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ricardo Pertuz
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Disclaimer *** This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
> > INFORMATION intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not
> > the intended recipient, please notify the sender by e-mail and delete the
> > original message. Further, you are not authorised to copy, disclose, or
> > distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other person and any such
> > actions are unlawful and strictly prohibited. This e-mail may contain
> > viruses. NxtGen Datacenter & Cloud Technologies Private Ltd ("NxtGen") has
> > taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk but is not liable
> > for any damage you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You
> > should carry out your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or
> > attachment. NxtGen reserves the right to monitor and review the content of
> > all messages sent to or from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from
> > this e-mail address may be stored on the NxtGen e-mail system. *** End of
> > Disclaimer ***NXTGEN***
> >
Ways to Simulate Partial Host Failure for HA Testing
Hi Community, We are trying to test the HA Feature in cloudstack where all VMs which have HA Enabled will failover to a second node, AND cloudstack will fence off the affected node using IPMI when the node is no longer healthy. Of course, the most common way to simulate a host failure is to abruptly kill the power. However, in our experiences, in most cases in production, there scenario is where the node is not dead (cause that would be easy to tell), but it is affected in some way (Dying or sick, but not dead, which is a much harder way to detect.) Does anyone have any recommendation how else I can simulate a host issue where the host is problematic but not fully dead? Just to be able to see if cloudstack does pick it up, fence off the node successfully and restart the VMs in the new host. Regards, Bryan
Re: Quota Tariff Plugin
Hello Murilo, Unfortunately, we could not address all the changes in the 4.19; we are expecting everything (tariff management via GUI, Quota GUI rework, charts, and so on) to be working on 4.20. I'll take note to keep this thread updated with the new changes. Best regards, Daniel Salvador (gutoveronezi) On 3/30/24 15:26, Murilo Moura wrote: Hello! Yesterday I installed version 4.19.0.1 and noticed that the tariff update still has the same problem as before (Unable to execute the quotatariffupdate API command due to the missing parameter name). Is there an estimate of when the quota plugin will be 100% operational? regards, *Murilo Moura* On Fri, Nov 3, 2023 at 9:16 AM Guto Veronezi wrote: Hello, Murilo There were several improvements on the Quota plugin in 4.18 (and there are some more to come). One of them was enabling operators to write rules to determine in which context the tariff will be applied; along with that, the vCPU, CPU_SPEED, and MEMORY tariffs were converted to RUNNING_VM tariffs with respective activation rules (it supports ES 5.1 on the JavaSript scripts). You can check issue #5891 [1] and PR #5909 [2] for more information. You can also check this video [3] on YouTube to get an overview of the new features yet to be ported to the community (though you probably will need to use the automatic subtitles generator). Unfortunately, we did not have time to put effort into the official documentation adjustments, but it is in the roadmap. If you have any doubt about how it works or any improvement suggestion, just let us know. Best regards, Daniel Salvador (gutoveronezi) [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/5891 [2] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/5909 [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tGhrzuxaOw&pp=ygUQcXVvdGEgY2xvdWRzdGFjaw%3D%3D On 11/3/23 02:16, Murilo Moura wrote: Guys, is the quota tariff plugin still in development? I ask because in version 4.18 I've noticed that the memory tariff, for example, isn't being calculated or saved in the cloud_usage table, in addition to the error that appears when trying to update a tariff (Unable to execute API command quotatariffupdate due to missing parameter name).
