cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sebastien Goasguen <>
Subject Re: [ACS41] Discuss CLOUDSTACK-2463 being resolved in 4.1 vs 4.2
Date Wed, 22 May 2013 14:02:58 GMT

On May 22, 2013, at 9:55 AM, Chip Childers <> wrote:

> CC'ing Animesh and Alena (since they are the ones offering to be in
> contact).
> Nicolas - keep in mind that they are US West Coast time.  And when you
> say 6PM, which timezone are you in specifically?

Paris time, currently PST +9, 9am for Animesh

> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 01:46:27PM +0200, wrote:
>> Hi,
>> is it possible to have a meeting today, May 22 6pm for Europe ?
>> Guillaume is the privileged interlocutor.
>> Regards.
>> e 21/05/2013 22:20, Chip Childers a écrit :
>>> Adding Nicolas to the CC line to be sure that he sees Animesh's offer.
>>> Animesh - Nicolas is in the EU, so I'd expect a reply tomorrow?
>>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 01:01:59PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: []
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 7:30 AM
>>>>> To:
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ACS41] Discuss CLOUDSTACK-2463 being resolved in 4.1 vs
>>>>> Hi
>>>>> We didn't so much choose the Security Groups feature as we found that
>>>>> VLAN option, which is the only other option available in 2.2.13, wouldn't
>>>>> us achieve what we had in mind in terms of Network Architecture.
>>>>> This was more of a default choice.
>>>>> Our need was/is to :
>>>>> - use external gateways (don't use Virtual Routers as gateways)
>>>>> - use external firewalls
>>>>> - have 2 or 3 VLANs, depending on customers' needs, for each "customer
>>>>> platform". A "customer platform" in our own terminology is mapped to
>>>>> Domain and an Account in the CS terminology. Those VLAN are affected
>>>>> externally by our own tool which call CloudStack and set the appropriate
>>>>> VLANs in the Networks attached to a domain.
>>>>> - not have overlapping subnets between customers. We split our subnet
>>>>> between customers, each has a different one
>>>>> And we couldn't have that if we had chosen in our Zone configuration
>>>>> Advanced Network with VLAN instead of Security Groups. But we don't use
>>>>> the Security Groups feature itself.
>>>>> Regarding these needs what do you think is the best way for us to upgrade
>>>>> from 2.2.13 to 4.1 and not break existing customers ?
>>>> [Animesh>] I am still not following the use-case completely, should we
do a go to meeting ? Alena and I can  join. Let me know what time works best for you.
>> -- 
>> Nicolas Lamirault
>> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles
ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message
par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques
etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>> France Telecom - Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere,
deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information
that may be protected by law;
>> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this
message and its attachments.
>> As emails may be altered, France Telecom - Orange is not liable for messages that
have been modified, changed or falsified.
>> Thank you.

View raw message