cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Murali Reddy <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] EIP Enhancements FS & Design Document
Date Mon, 20 May 2013 14:19:24 GMT


As mentioned in my merge request [1], I have generalised this feature and
tried to not enforce AWS EIP semantics. Please see the updated FS [2]


Let me know if you need further clarification.


On 15/05/13 10:51 PM, "Venkata SwamyBabu Budumuru"
<> wrote:

>I didn't find the old mail thread about this FS. Hence posting my review
>comments in a new thread.
>I have few queries/ comments after reviewing the FS [1]
>[2] Prior discussion thread :
>1. Are we providing any flexibility for admin to impose no. of EIPs an
>account can use?
>2. As per the Spec, when an instance has a public ip with
>is_system=false, then we don't let user asosciateEIP. I feel, it would be
>better if allow the user to associate EIP in this case?
>3. When "Associate PublicIP" is false then are going to keep all the
>semantics to stand the same except the fact that vm deployment by default
>not getting the public ip?
>4. Do allow CS to reprogram NAT rules on the provider in case of n/w
>5. Under Scope, point 4 says that we only support static NAT on region
>level EIP. Is this true for advanced zones as well? we cannot we support
>other services like PF / LB etc..,?
>6. Can you confirm that we are supporting this for Shared n/ws in
>advanced zone?
>7. I see in the spec that "createElasticIpRange" API not having any VLAN
>id. Are we supporting region level IP CIDR with both tagged and untagged?
>multiple subnets in the same VLAN and different VLANs etc..,
>8. When there is an ElasticIp associated with instance, Does the current
>implementation release this IP and gives it back to account when VM got
>to stopped state? if yes, does this mean user has to associateEIP every
>time user starts instance?

View raw message