This is a great step forward.
Does anyone have an installation manual that is correct?
When will there be a version of Cloudstack with a manual that actually
works?
I have given up on Cloudstack for now but will give it another shot when
it works.
I hope that someone at least walks through the procedure once before
releasing a new version.
It is very disheartening to spend hours executing procedures and then
redoing it when it does not work trying to find where one went wrong.
There are no verification steps in the process to help understand where
you got off the track.
IMHO the manual is too complex in trying to support too many options.
There should be a simple track through for each of the main hypervisor
choices. It would also be helpful to include some diagrams and
descriptions of what the proposed installation is supposed to look like
at key points. "At the end of these steps, you will have a KVM
hypervisor that is attached to your firewall as x.x.x.x on eth0.xxxx and
VLANs on xxx.xxx......"
Trying to guess what one is making by reading the recipe is a bit
frustrating.
Ron
On 31/07/2013 2:06 PM, Edison Su wrote:
The KVM installation guide at
http://cloudstack.apache.org/docs/en-US/Apache_CloudStack/4.1.0/html/Installation_Guide/hypervisor-kvm-install-flow.html
, is unnecessary complicated and inaccurate.
For example, we don't need to configure vlan on kvm host by users themselves,
cloudstack-agent will create vlans automatically.
All users need to do is to create bridges(if the default bridge created by
cloudstack-agent is not enough), then add these bridge names from cloudstack
mgt server UI during the zone creation.
-----Original Message-----
From: Noel Kendall [mailto:noeldkend...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 9:49 AM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: CS 4.1.0 - this will help a number of people who struggle with
Advanced Networking
The documentation for installation in a KVM environment is utterly misleading.
The documentation reads as though one can set up the bridge for the public
network with any name one chooses, the default being cloudbr0.
You cannot use just any old name. That simply will not work.
Let's suppose I have a public network that I isolate on VLAN 5, which is
interfaced on ethernet adapter eth4. I will need to define an adapter eth4.5
with VLAN set to yes.
So far, so good.
Next, for the bridge...
By enabling debugging output in the log, I was able to see that the code looks
for a bridge with the name cloudVirBr5 for my public network.
I had tried several different approaches, none would work if I did not name my
bridge cloudVirBr5, and set my traffic label on the network configurationto the
same.
I have seen numerous posts in the mailing lists, blog entries, you name it,
representing frustrations of throngs of users trying to validate a CS setup.
The documentation is utterly wrong and misleading.
Summary:
does not work:traffic label: cloudbr0 with eth4.5 pointing to cloudbr0 - code
still tries to create a breth4.5 and enlist eth4.5 to it but cannot because it
is already enlisted to cloudbr0.
Good luck everyone with advanced networking with VLAN isolation on CentOS KVM
hosts.
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
