-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
Advanced SG: allow create/update physical networks with vlan range #8122
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Advanced SG: allow create/update physical networks with vlan range #8122
Conversation
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
DaanHoogland
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
clgtm
|
😃 Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 7445 Packaging result: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. |
|
@blueorangutan test |
|
@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
|
[SF] Trillian test result (tid-8039)
|
|
@blueorangutan LLtest basicZone |
|
@DaanHoogland a [LL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
| if (vnetRange != null && zoneType == NetworkType.Basic) { | ||
| throw new InvalidParameterValueException("Can't add vnet range to the physical network in the Basic zone"); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
seems like a new method to be called in two places @weizhouapache ?
|
[LL]Trillian test result (tid-6869)
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## 4.18 #8122 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 13.06% 13.06%
- Complexity 9108 9111 +3
=========================================
Files 2720 2720
Lines 257531 257588 +57
Branches 40150 40156 +6
=========================================
+ Hits 33655 33663 +8
- Misses 219648 219695 +47
- Partials 4228 4230 +2
... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
|
[LL] Trillian Build Failed (tid-6875) |
|
@blueorangutan LLtest securityGroups keepEnv |
|
@DaanHoogland a [LL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
|
[LL]Trillian test result (tid-6879)
|
@DaanHoogland |
yes, even slightly better ;) |
|
@weizhouapache am I correct in assuming this also needs a UI change? (not necessarily in the scope of this PR) |
@DaanHoogland we could hide the icon "update network" for basic zones, if needed |
|
thanks @weizhouapache works in advancedSG as well |
shwstppr
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code LGTM
rajujith
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM.
Created advanced zone with SG.
I could add and update VLAN ranges against the physical network with guest traffic type.


Description
This PR is a followup of #7719
L2 network is supported in advanced zone with security groups since #7719
However, the vlan must be specified for now, as vlan range is not allowed to be specified in guest physical network
This PR allows create/update vlan range of physical networks, so that vlan of L2 networks can be automatically allocated by cloudstack.
This PR also fixes an issue that VM without security groups cannot be deployed on L2 networks.
Types of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity
Feature/Enhancement Scale
Bug Severity
Screenshots (if appropriate):
How Has This Been Tested?
How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?