blueorangutan commented on pull request #237:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/237#issuecomment-900036399
Doc build preview: http://qa.cloudstack.cloud/docs/WIP-PROOFING/pr/237.
(SL-JID 131)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To resp
blueorangutan commented on pull request #237:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/237#issuecomment-900035962
@davidjumani a Jenkins job has been kicked to build the document. I'll keep
you posted as I make progress.
--
This is an automated message from the Apach
davidjumani commented on pull request #237:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/237#issuecomment-900035477
@blueorangutan docbuild
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL abov
davidjumani opened a new pull request #237:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/237
Adding a note / warning about boot mode changes when migrating VMs between
Xen / XCP-ng versions
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the mes
Hi PL,
I think Openwrt can do all of them, similar to Debian' apt-get Openwrt ships
with a opkg package management tool that supports thousands of pkgs and using
opkg you can install any of the packages such as strongswan/ipsec, haproxy,
java/jre for systemvm agents etc, customise the rc.d star
Hi All,
Perhaps you also want to have a look at OPNSense. I think others also mentioned
it before.
It is mature and stable. It is based on hardened free-bsd.
I have worked with Ansible Modules to automate its deployment and I can see a
lot of benefits that would make integration easy. For exam
Hi Rohit,
So look like OpenWRT could be a good alternative then, but how would you
handle other services such as load-balancing, vpn,...? would that be from
another Service VMs, kind of doing service mesh ?
Cheers,
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 5:37 AM Rohit Yadav
wrote:
> Hi PL,
>
> I tested Open
Hi PL,
I tested OpenWRT on KVM, and I don't see any performance loss in terms of
bandwidth/IO and memory, in fact it seems to be faster than the Debian based
systemvmtemplate due to:
* Smaller kernel size (the Debian kernel includes all sorts of device
drivers for sound and what not which
Thanks Hean, Kristaps, Wido for your feedback.
I think we've some quorum and consensus on how we should proceed with IPv6
support with static routing (phase1). Based on my proof-of-concept and
discussions, I believe we may target this feature as early as 4.17 and I
welcome offer by Kristaps and
