Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 57EEDD388 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 23:29:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 11211 invoked by uid 500); 7 Aug 2012 23:29:01 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 11183 invoked by uid 500); 7 Aug 2012 23:29:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 11172 invoked by uid 99); 7 Aug 2012 23:29:01 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Aug 2012 23:29:01 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of outbackdingo@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.161.175] (HELO mail-gg0-f175.google.com) (209.85.161.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Aug 2012 23:28:53 +0000 Received: by ggmq1 with SMTP id q1so189596ggm.6 for ; Tue, 07 Aug 2012 16:28:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=3K4HlZ2TRIOiofTc3Z2h95L6n/pZPxSKlz7RIEcEUZg=; b=zbD0/IEvX1t2eU0+Wx33MDLSTUop/wBkh9yGReKXsPvmpPH95kdBqseziA9rICE7Vy LEZsrj9tLQWsJEEh0xkglZYTFn3tsd7OzZfi3UcCdkdD3qGPPOKlQ5042taun0Ym5ls+ /fLgrqGtIwvSesbLk+GQrSmgxnaZIyCCIgx3TjoHbW6xPqWBBzZd7W61I6YiPDLclQV9 9NYIci29yIU+PjfZqU47CxFtsGrtkkFu+heERdbOruTY+ejgwP/5NfXzAon0Eq/8z2UW 9qmWCfTvK0pRheBq4o50tvLjEdl7EYjTBvcNfjtil/TtTvUqIX5LgCvaNNXC9gszPJ7p Y/KQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.190.234 with SMTP id gt10mr200309igc.20.1344382112556; Tue, 07 Aug 2012 16:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.27.163 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 16:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 19:28:32 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: VLANS in Advance Networking NOT NEEDED. From: Outback Dingo To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Just a curiosity, wonder if there way any way to allow advanced networking without using VLANS I get the security concept, though i question their use in certain configurations and that not everyone can afford the high end switches required to maintain a VLAN network. Simply put, we should be given a choice. I can configure XCP / XEN hosts to do exactly what i want without cloudstack, by giving all VMs dual interfaces one for public and one for private without issues. As soon as I put CS in the mix I am forced to use vlans in my configuration which my current network topology doesnt support. and yes, I have two separate physical network segments, so i question why i need vlans in the first place as im not running public address space and private address space over the same physical network, so why does CS limit various hypervisors usage by forcing vlan topologies