cloudstack-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "ASF GitHub Bot (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CLOUDSTACK-4374) As a Developer I want to have HA enabled for routers that are part or a redundant network or VPC
Date Sat, 12 Dec 2015 11:21:46 GMT


ASF GitHub Bot commented on CLOUDSTACK-4374:

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

> As a Developer I want to have HA enabled for routers that are part or a redundant network
or VPC
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: CLOUDSTACK-4374
>                 URL:
>             Project: CloudStack
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the default.) 
>          Components: Virtual Router
>    Affects Versions: 4.1.0, 4.4.0, 4.5.0, 4.6.0, 4.6.1
>            Reporter: Roeland Kuipers
>            Assignee: Wilder Rodrigues
>             Fix For: 4.7.0
> We provide redundant routers with HA functionality through a special service offering.
> However these router pairs are provisioned with ha_enabled=0, so when one or both of
them fail they will never be restarted by CS. 
> 2013-08-16 15:51:16,101 DEBUG [cloud.ha.HighAvailabilityManagerImpl] (HA-Worker-0:work-4335)
VM is not HA enabled so we're done.
> This is currently hardcoded in @ 1633
>    boolean offerHA = routerOffering.getOfferHA();
>                 /* We don't provide HA to redundant router VMs, admin should own it all,
and redundant router themselves are HA */
>                 if (isRedundant) {
>                     offerHA = false;
>                 }
> We like redundancy and like to have HA on our redundant routers. We like to configure
this ourselves through service offerings and do not like being helt hostage by these lines
of codes:) We do like to own it all in our admin role :)
> Besides this, this is also very counter-intuitive as we were expecting HA on our redundant
routers, since it was configured on their service offering.
> So can we get rid of these lines of code? And have this controlled through service offerings
as it should IMHO.? Unless this has negative impact which we are not aware off?
> Cheers & Thanks,
> Roeland
> Details of the original commit which injected this code:
> Commit: a269b089ae38d0d04db2fa0f4c8e839480476ddc [a269b08]
> Parents: a2cc66ce41
> Author: Sheng Yang <>
> Date: 17 december 2011 03:52:59 CET
> Commit Date: 19 december 2011 22:29:48 CET
> bug 12608: NaaS: Don't shutdown elements if cleanup=false
> We can use the restartNetwork mechanism to recover the disconnected redundant
> router.
> Also disable HA for redundant router. Admin would take responsibilty to recover
> the failure router, because redundant routers themselves are one layer HA.
> status 12608: resolved fixed

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message