Great to hear that, Rohit, even if you don't complete the book ;) And
Andrija will survive the interview đŸ˜‡
I can't wait to watch the interviews with you :)
Kind regards,
Slavka
Thanks for nominating Slavka đŸ˜…
(Note to myself: complete the Humour for Dummies book before Ivet reaches out
to me)
Regards.
From: Andrija Panic
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2021 21:59
To: users
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Meet the CloudStack Communi
Hi PL,
You can check the ikev2 support in 4.15+ here:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4953
I think a generic VPN framework-provider feature is probably what we need (i.e.
to let user or admin decide what VPN provider they want, supporting
strongswan/ipsec and openvpn) so I'm not tryi
(me having a sense of humor Slavka? really, come on... I'll pay 10 beers
just to avoid IvetI mean the interview!)
On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 16:04, Ivet Petrova
wrote:
> Thank you Slavka. Great suggestions! Let’s discuss with them.
>
> I am open for other suggestions from community members :)
>
again my 2 cent(o)s:
- strongswan to stay for S-2-S (supporting IKE2 explicitly now etc) - as it
has been working great (with some recent, multiple-remote subnet issues
resolved, with human-layer-8 problems will continue to exist - i.e.
misconfiguration)
- strongswan (L2TP/IpSec) remote VPN is pain
btw, I like the idea of CloudStack offering OpenVPN as a solution !
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:40 AM Pierre-Luc Dion
wrote:
> Just to be sure, what CloudStack > v4.15 uses Strongswan/l2tp or
> strongswan/ikev2 ?
>
> Because l2tp became complicated to configure on native vpn clients on some
> OSe
Just to be sure, what CloudStack > v4.15 uses Strongswan/l2tp or
strongswan/ikev2 ?
Because l2tp became complicated to configure on native vpn clients on some
OSes, kind of deprecated remote management VPN, compared to IKEv2.
I'm a bit concerned about OpenVPN for the clients, what if binaries beco
Thanks all for the feedback so far, looks like the majority of people on the
thread would prefer OpenVPN but for s2s they may continue to prefer
strongswan/ipsec for site-to-site VPC feature. If we're unable to reach
consensus then a general-purpose provider-framework may be more flexible to the
I understand that OpenVPN is a great option and far adopted.
I am ++1 in allowing Users/Admins to choose which VPN provider suits them
best; creating an offering (or global settings) that would allow setting
which VPN provider will be used would be awesome.
I understand that OpenVPN is a great op
Hi Ivet, all,
The video with Gabriel was great! I hope these people don't get mad at
me for involving them in this, but I'll be happy to hear something
from Rohit, Daan or Andrija (mixed with his sense of humor) :)
Best regards,
Slavka
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 11:30 AM Ivet Petrova
wrote:
> H
Hello,
Daan, I agree we should provide capability to select the vpn solution to
use, the question would be, should it be a global setting generic for the
whole region or per VPC?
I think it should be a global setting to reduce the requirement complexity
of a region, but per VPC or customer(accoun
Hi All,
The default branch has been renamed to 'main' (from 'master'), for the
following CloudStack project repos.
- cloudstack
- cloudstack-documentation
- cloudstack-www
- cloudstack-cloudmonkey
- cloudstack-kubernetes-provider
- cloudstack-ec2stack
- cloudstack-gces
This is a potential religious debate, I think it makes the most sense to
try and make the provider optional and let the operator or even the
end-user decide. I see how this is an extra challenge, but does it make
sense?
On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 10:24 AM Rohit Yadav
wrote:
> All,
>
> We've histori
13 matches
Mail list logo
