incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com>
Subject Re: CentOS System VM?
Date Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:06:42 GMT
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Bryan Whitehead <driver@megahappy.net> wrote:
> having custom systemvm's seems ideal. A network offering can be paired with
> a systemVM (or something along those lines).
>
> Giving the community the ability to create their own Vyatta-like offerings
> is what will drive innovation. Would be fantastic to have a number of
> VPN/LB/IDS/etc offerings in the marketplace to choose from that just work
> seamlessly inside cloudstack.

Huge +1 to this.  IMO, I prefer virtual appliances to physical for
network services...  and being able to delegate instantiation and
lifecycle to the same logic that manages system VMs would be a very
valuable option.

>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Kelceydamage@bbits <kelcey@bbits.ca> wrote:
>
>> Great to hear. Let me know the name of the developer, and I'll talk to the
>> west coast arm if Vyatta and get them to match the contribution.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Dec 6, 2012, at 9:12 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" <imusayev@webmd.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Kelcey
>> >
>> > Made some headway already.
>> >
>> > Got a response from one Viyatta developer who was referred to us from
>> CEO as per my previous LinkedIn message.
>> >
>> > I will introduce him/her to CS but I will need CS dev team to help out
>> with knowledge gap and transfer. As well as people like you and I for
>> testing and whatever else we can do to help move this along.
>> >
>> > -ilya
>> >
>> > "Kelcey Damage (BBITS)" <kelcey@bbits.ca> wrote:
>> > That’s why I did some in person work. I am going to really try and
>> massage
>> > my relationship with Brocade and get access to the Vyatta engineers.
>> >
>> > Hopefully between us we can get in touch with at least one influencer at
>> > Brocade/Vyatta.
>> >
>> > -kd
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusayev@webmd.net]
>> > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 11:19 AM
>> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Subject: RE: CentOS System VM?
>> >
>> > I started contacting few people, I contacted CEO of Vyatta and another
>> > person who now works for Citrix but was VP of Marketing for Vyatta. I did
>> > both contacts via LinkedIn.
>> > I do think LinkedIn will probably be ignored because it's a great
>> marketing
>> > spam tool.
>> >
>> > We should try direct email.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Kelceydamage@bbits [mailto:kelcey@bbits.ca]
>> > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 12:42 PM
>> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Subject: Re: CentOS System VM?
>> >
>> > Interesting, I spoke with Brocade yesterday and the also feel their
>> Vyatta
>> > acquisition is a good gap offering for cloud services.
>> >
>> > Maybe we should see if their willing to produce the code?
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> > On Dec 6, 2012, at 9:07 AM, Clayton Weise <cweise@iswest.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I would love to see a Vyatta based router as well, and they have a
>> RESTful
>> > API (which is both good and bad given the mixture of tools.  But making
>> use
>> > of a REST interface on a virtual router opens up the ability to integrate
>> > with other vendors who have virtual router/firewall appliances.
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusayev@webmd.net]
>> >> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 8:43 AM
>> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >> Subject: RE: CentOS System VM?
>> >>
>> >> Vyatta provides great L3-L4 support with good number of features and
>> > interface.
>> >>
>> >> If there is a doc on how to create and integrate your system offering  -
>> > that would be great. Unfortunately vyatta is also debian based.. but
>> that's
>> > not exactly a hard negative.
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusayev@webmd.net]
>> >> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 11:25 AM
>> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >> Subject: RE: CentOS System VM?
>> >>
>> >> I guess we can try creating alternative system offering :)
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Kelceydamage@bbits [mailto:kelcey@bbits.ca]
>> >> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 3:17 AM
>> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >> Subject: Re: CentOS System VM?
>> >>
>> >> I'm also interested in swapping out ha_proxy for nginx so the lb feature
>> > can support SSL termination. Currently building my own VRs as guest VMs
>> on
>> > shared networks for that feature.
>> >>
>> >> Is the community thinking about proper ssl endpoints and offloading?
>> >>
>> >> Sent from my iPhone
>> >>
>> >> On Dec 5, 2012, at 11:30 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" <imusayev@webmd.net>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Granted both debian wheezy and centos/rhel 6, run the same major kernel
>> > version 2.6.32 i386 and hopefully same glibc library (need to confirm) -
>> it
>> > should be really easy to port the code over without needing to recompile
>> > anything. I don't believe we do anything overly complex - within
>> application
>> > code - that would glue components to specific OS. Applications like
>> apache,
>> > dns masq, haproxy, sshd and dhcp can be stock versions of what OS vendor
>> > released.
>> >>>
>> >>> This is my observations so far and I will give it a shot when time
>> allows
>> > to confirm.
>> >>>
>> >>> If someone knows of reason why this would fail, please let me know so
I
>> > don't waste my time:) but I am fairly optimistic.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks
>> >>> Ilya
>> >>>
>> >>> "Kelceydamage@bbits" <kelcey@bbits.ca> wrote:
>> >>> This sounds great, however I am hoping for updated wiki on how to
>> create
>> > your own system vm(distro).
>> >>>
>> >>> Maybe one day....
>> >>>
>> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>> >>>
>> >>> On Dec 5, 2012, at 5:04 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>> > <Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> The current system vm is getting long in the tooth. I (or Rohit
>> >>>> Yadav) will looking into building a wheezy-based systemvm that
>> >>>> includes hyper-v drivers.
>> >>>> Hopefully network throughput should be better as well when used
with
>> >>>> multiple cores.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 12/5/12 10:38 AM, "Jason Davis" <scr512@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> TBH Hyper-V synthetic drivers(modules) is supported in the mainline
>> >>>>> kernel.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So the argument that CentOS 6.x has better support is moot.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This assumes that the kernel version on the SSVM is at least
2.6.32.
>> >>>>> I ran Ubuntu Server 11.x and Centos 6.x on Hyper-V natively
and
>> >>>>> just needed to load the kernel modules for the synthetic stuffs
to
>> > work.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Ancient example of getting the Hyper-V modules built/working
on
>> >>>>> Debian 6.0
>> >>>>> http://virtualisationandmanagement.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/debian-
>> >>>>> o n-hype r-v-with-4-vcpu-support-and-syntetic-network/
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Kelceydamage@bbits
>> >>>>> <kelcey@bbits.ca>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> I'm very interested in this.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Dec 5, 2012, at 10:10 AM, Donal Lafferty
>> >>>>>> <donal.lafferty@citrix.com>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Has anyone looked into building a system VM that runs
on a CentOS
>> >>>>>> distro?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>

Mime
View raw message