server: check startip and startipv6 of shared network by DaanHoogland · Pull Request #10704 · apache/cloudstack

DaanHoogland · 2025-04-14T08:49:09Z

Description

This PR...

Fixes: #10664

Types of changes

Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
build/CI
test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Major
Minor

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

DaanHoogland · 2025-04-14T08:49:30Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-04-14T08:50:04Z

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

codecov · 2025-04-14T08:57:54Z

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 7 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 15.16%. Comparing base (99ea77d) to head (9c78d22).
Report is 2 commits behind head on 4.19.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ain/java/com/cloud/network/NetworkServiceImpl.java	0.00%	6 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               4.19   #10704   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     15.16%   15.16%           
- Complexity    11327    11329    +2     
=========================================
  Files          5415     5415           
  Lines        474848   474853    +5     
  Branches      57914    57917    +3     
=========================================
+ Hits          72018    72024    +6     
+ Misses       394781   394779    -2     
- Partials       8049     8050    +1

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	`4.28% <ø> (ø)`
unittests	`15.89% <0.00%> (+<0.01%)`	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

blueorangutan · 2025-04-14T09:43:55Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✖️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 13043

…etwork revert part of apache#10168

blueorangutan · 2025-04-14T11:27:27Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 13044

DaanHoogland · 2025-04-15T10:27:21Z

@weizhouapache , #10114 seems to be unable to occur with these checkjs in place:

weizhouapache · 2025-04-15T10:54:18Z

@weizhouapache , #10114 seems to be unable to occur with these checkjs in place:

Can you test with a new shared network offering with specifyvlan=false and specifyiprange=false ?

ignore it , it is not supported

weizhouapache · 2025-04-15T12:27:30Z

server/src/main/java/com/cloud/network/NetworkServiceImpl.java

+            if (!ntwkOff.isSpecifyIpRanges()) {
+                throw new CloudRuntimeException("The 'specifyipranges' parameter should be true for Shared Networks");
+            }


there is already a check when create the network offering

cloudstack/server/src/main/java/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java

Lines 6720 to 6730 in b2b2218

if (specifyIpRanges) {

if (type == GuestType.Isolated) {

if (serviceProviderMap.containsKey(Service.SourceNat)) {

throw new InvalidParameterValueException("SpecifyIpRanges can only be true for Shared network offerings and Isolated with no SourceNat service");

}

}

} else {

if (type == GuestType.Shared) {

throw new InvalidParameterValueException("SpecifyIpRanges should always be true for Shared network offerings");

}

}

ok, leaving it in in case someone hacks the DB.

weizhouapache

code lgtm

#10114 (vlan is not allocated) is caused by missing startip and endip
#10664 is a consequence of #10114

if startip and endip are both passed, #10114 and #10664 will not raise

blueorangutan · 2025-04-16T01:12:43Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-12995)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 50803 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr10704-t12995-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 132 look OK, 1 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_02_list_cpvm_vm	`Failure`	0.07	test_ssvm.py
test_04_cpvm_internals	`Failure`	0.06	test_ssvm.py

vladimirpetrov

LGTM based on manual testing.

DaanHoogland · 2025-04-17T07:24:05Z

server/src/main/java/com/cloud/network/NetworkServiceImpl.java

+            if (ipv6 && Objects.isNull(startIPv6)) {
+                throw new CloudRuntimeException("IPv6 address range needs to be provided");
+            }


@wido , we merged this and then came to the conclusion this may interfere with SLAAC setups. Can you comment?

In shared networks you will never use a start and endip as SLAAC does the work. So these variables will never be used.

The subnet needs to be provided, a /64 and that's it. People can fill in dummy information here, it will not do anything and not break anything

ok, so in spite of this workaround (no high priority) we don’ t even need the UI elements for ipv6 , you are saying @wido ? (cc @weizhouapache )

yes, I think we do not need the start ipv6 and end ipv6 for shared networks on UI
the UI change is low priority,
the check on startipv6 in java should be removed soon

revert part of apache#10168

boring-cyborg bot added the component:networking label Apr 14, 2025

remove condition for associated network when !specifyvlan in shared n…

9c78d22

…etwork revert part of apache#10168

DaanHoogland force-pushed the ghi10664-specifySharedVlan branch from e178089 to 9c78d22 Compare April 14, 2025 09:56

DaanHoogland marked this pull request as ready for review April 15, 2025 10:27

weizhouapache reviewed Apr 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

weizhouapache approved these changes Apr 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

DaanHoogland added the status:needs-testing label Apr 15, 2025

DaanHoogland linked an issue Apr 15, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request

Creating Shared Network is failing when using specifyVlan is false #10664

Closed

weizhouapache changed the title ~~remove condition for associated network when !specifyvlan in shared network~~ server: check startip and endip of shared network Apr 16, 2025

vladimirpetrov self-assigned this Apr 16, 2025

vladimirpetrov approved these changes Apr 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

vladimirpetrov removed the status:needs-testing label Apr 16, 2025

weizhouapache merged commit 53d3d19 into apache:4.19 Apr 16, 2025
25 of 26 checks passed

weizhouapache mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2025

Creating Shared Network is failing when using specifyVlan is false #10664

Closed

DaanHoogland deleted the ghi10664-specifySharedVlan branch April 17, 2025 06:56

DaanHoogland commented Apr 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

weizhouapache changed the title ~~server: check startip and endip of shared network~~ server: check startip and startipv6 of shared network Apr 17, 2025

Pearl1594 added this to the 4.19.3 milestone May 1, 2025

dhslove pushed a commit to ablecloud-team/ablestack-cloud that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2025

server: check startip and endip of shared network (apache#10704)

7d84ead

revert part of apache#10168

	if (specifyIpRanges) {
	if (type == GuestType.Isolated) {
	if (serviceProviderMap.containsKey(Service.SourceNat)) {
	throw new InvalidParameterValueException("SpecifyIpRanges can only be true for Shared network offerings and Isolated with no SourceNat service");
	}
	}
	} else {
	if (type == GuestType.Shared) {
	throw new InvalidParameterValueException("SpecifyIpRanges should always be true for Shared network offerings");
	}
	}

Conversation

DaanHoogland commented Apr 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Types of changes

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Apr 14, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Apr 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Apr 15, 2025

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Apr 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

weizhouapache Apr 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland Apr 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

weizhouapache left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 16, 2025

Uh oh!

vladimirpetrov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland Apr 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

wido Apr 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland Apr 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

weizhouapache Apr 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland Apr 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

DaanHoogland commented Apr 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Apr 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

weizhouapache commented Apr 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading