1) Added API frameworks for the feature. New commands:
* CreateVPCCmd
* ListVPCsCmd
* DeleteVPCCmd
* UpdateVPCCmd
* CreateVPCOfferingCmd
* UpdateVPCOfferingCmd
* DeleteVPCOfferingCmd
* ListVPCOfferingsCmd
2) New db tables:
* `cloud`.`vpc`
* `cloud`.`vpc_offerings`
* `cloud`.`vpc_offering_service_map`
and corresponding VO/Dao objects.
Added vpc_id field to `cloud.`networks` table - not null when network belongs to VPC
3) New Manager and Service interfaces- VpcManager/VpcService
4) Automatically create new VpcOffering (if doesn't exist) on system start
5) New Action events:
* VPC.CREATE
* VPC.UPDATE
* VPC.DELETE
* VPC.OFFERING.CREATE
* VPC.OFFERING.UPDATE
* VPC.OFFERING.DELETE
Only DHCP entry need to know if no one apply the entries(when VM is starting
up), other rules should be safe when return true anyway.
status 14470: resolved fixed
The routing table with two nics may be messed up, due to we sent same
router(gateway) information from different DHCP server, in order to specify
default gateway. E.g.
Network A: 192.168.1.0/24, gw 192.168.1.1
Network B: 192.168.2.0/24, gw 192.168.2.1
User VM: Nic 1 connect to network A, get ip 192.168.1.10; nic 2 connect to
network B, get ip 192.168.2.10.
Set network A as the default network of user VM.
Currently we would send this information to user VM through DHCP offer:
In network A: dhcp-option:router 192.168.1.1
In network B: dhcp-option:router 192.168.1.1
So both NIC in the guest VM would receive 192.168.1.1 as router(gateway).
But, in CentOS 5.6, dhclient-scripts try to tell if the gateway is reachable
for current subnet.
So when we try to enable nic 2(eth1) of user VM, dhclient would receive:
IP: 192.168.2.10
Mask: 255.255.255.0
Router: 192.168.1.1
Then it would found that the specified gateway(router) is not within its own
subnet(192.168.2.0/24). But since we send out this ip(192.168.1.1) as the
gateway for it, dhclient thought that it should got someway to access the
network through this IP. So it would execute:
ip route add 192.168.1.1 dev eth1
ip route replace default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth1
But it can never reach 192.168.1.1(which is in the eth0's subnet and the
gateway of eth0) by go through eth1 interface. So it is messed up.
We've tested Windows 2008 R2, CentOS 5.3, CentOS 5.6 and Ubuntu 10.04. Windows
and Ubuntu are fine with above policy.
To solve this, we send different dhcp:router option according to the guest OS
type now.
We may need expand this list later, but for now we only know that CentOS and
RHEL would behavior in this way.
status 14042: resolved fixed
Summary of changes :
- Added a new flag -s to ipassoc command to carry if the ip address is
used for SNAT or not.
- SNAT is completly decoupled from the first flag. first flag is used
to decide if the ip address is first ip address of the interface.
- -s and -f are independent, SNAT can be enabled on the non-first ip
also.
Changes:
- After deployment of Router failed, we did not throw out the error inorder to retry the start using another hypervisorType.
- But there is no other hypervisor to try, causing the failed and expunged router to be passed on further leading to an NPE later
- So in case there are no more hypervisors to retry the router start, we should throw out the original error.
Admin can either configure system.vm.default.hypervisor which is a global configuration for all zones, or call updatezone add defaultSystemVMHypervisorType
status 12139: resolved fixed
Introduce the concept of Ip Deployer. The IP deployer would be responible for
apply IP to the element. Most element's IP deployer is itself, but it can be
someone else if we want to implement inline mode in the future.
Alena Prokharchyk
anthony
Naredula Janardhana Reddy
Sheng Yang
frank
kishan
Sheng Yang
Kelven Yang
prachi
Edison Su