Congratulations on your first Pull Request and welcome to the Apache CloudStack community! If you have any issues or are unsure about any anything please check our Contribution Guide (https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)
Here are some useful points:

• In case of a new feature add useful documentation (raise doc PR at https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation)
• Be patient and persistent. It might take some time to get a review or get the final approval from the committers.
• Pay attention to the quality of your code, ensure tests are passing and your PR doesn't have conflicts.
• Please follow ASF Code of Conduct for all communication including (but not limited to) comments on Pull Requests, Issues, Mailing list and Slack.
• Be sure to read the CloudStack Coding Conventions.
  Apache CloudStack is a community-driven project and together we are making it better 🚀.
  In case of doubts contact the developers at:
  Mailing List: dev@cloudstack.apache.org (https://cloudstack.apache.org/mailing-lists.html)
  Slack: https://apachecloudstack.slack.com/

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

0.0% Coverage
0.0% Duplication

is this ready for review @pierrelefevre ?

Yeah, should be!

@blueorangutan package

@DaanHoogland a 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.

Packaging result: ✖️ el7 ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✖️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 5830

Codecov Report

Merging #7386 (f86f78f) into main (f70b42a) will decrease coverage by 0.68%.
The diff coverage is 71.42%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #7386      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     29.11%   28.43%   -0.68%     
+ Complexity    30345    29274    -1071     
============================================
  Files          5100     5100              
  Lines        358542   358547       +5     
  Branches      52314    52314              
============================================
- Hits         104399   101970    -2429     
- Misses       239800   242583    +2783     
+ Partials      14343    13994     -349     

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

... and 215 files with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@blueorangutan package

@shwstppr a 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.

Packaging result: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 5901

@blueorangutan test

@DaanHoogland a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests

Trillian test result (tid-6416)
Environment: kvm-centos7 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server 7
Total time taken: 39566 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr7386-t6416-kvm-centos7.zip
Smoke tests completed. 108 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

@shwstppr Should be fixed now!

@blueorangutan package

@DaanHoogland a [SF] 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.

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 7195

@blueorangutan LLpackage

@DaanHoogland a [LL] 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.

Packaging result [LL]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 6190

@blueorangutan LLtest matrix

@DaanHoogland a [LL] Trillian-Jenkins matrix job (centos7 mgmt + xenserver71, rocky8 mgmt + vmware67u3, centos7 mgmt + kvmcentos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests

[LL] Trillian Build Failed (tid-6761)

[LL]Trillian test result (tid-6760)
Environment: xenserver-71 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server 7
Total time taken: 37839 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr7386-t6760-xenserver-71.zip
Smoke tests completed. 113 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

[LL]Trillian test result (tid-6762)
Environment: kvm-centos7 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server 7
Total time taken: 42079 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr7386-t6762-kvm-centos7.zip
Smoke tests completed. 113 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

[LL]Trillian test result (tid-6767)
Environment: vmware-67u3 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server r8
Total time taken: 43286 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr7386-t6767-vmware-67u3.zip
Smoke tests completed. 113 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

@weizhouapache can you please re-review?

@shwstppr @DaanHoogland

code lgtm
However, this has only impact on the domain-scope shared networks.

I think we could add the field to the interface ControlledEntityResponse, and expose domainpath to all entities.
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/main/api/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/ControlledEntityResponse.java

@shwstppr @DaanHoogland

code lgtm However, this has only impact on the domain-scope shared networks.

I think we could add the field to the interface ControlledEntityResponse, and expose domainpath to all entities. https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/main/api/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/ControlledEntityResponse.java

I see your point @weizhouapache :

localcloud) 🐱 > list networks filter=name,type,domainpath
{
  "count": 2,
  "network": [
    {
      "name": "bla",
      "type": "Isolated"
    },
    {
      "domainpath": "ROOT",
      "name": "sla",
      "type": "Shared"
    }
  ]
}

should for this refuse the PR as is or can we merge and create follow up (an) issue(s)?

I'm okay with merging this and work on follow-up

I'm okay with merging this and work on follow-up

I am ok with it
cc @shwstppr @DaanHoogland

Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request!