Ownership selection in VPC tiers and VPC public IPs - #9692
Conversation
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #9692 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 18.09% 18.09%
- Complexity 16723 16725 +2
=========================================
Files 6037 6037
Lines 542580 542671 +91
Branches 66427 66451 +24
=========================================
+ Hits 98155 98179 +24
- Misses 433399 433465 +66
- Partials 11026 11027 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@sureshanaparti 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. |
|
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 11164 |
|
This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch. |
|
@gpordeus could you fix the conflicts? |
|
@gpordeus Since this is for the 4.22.1 release, could you retarget the PR to the 4.22 branch? |
|
Hi, @rajujith, @sureshanaparti, @JoaoJandre and @winterhazel Sorry for taking so long on getting back to this, it had been a while since I made this and the conflicts with 4.22 threw me for a loop. I fixed the conflicts with the main branch and I fixed the instance listing when the tier belongs to a project. Could you take another look? |
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with no SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
|
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 17914 |
|
@blueorangutan test |
|
@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
|
[SF] Trillian test result (tid-16127)
|
|
Hi @gp-santos is this PR ready for testing? |
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@shwstppr a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with no SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
|
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 19080 |
| private String purpose; | ||
|
|
||
| @SerializedName(ApiConstants.VPC_ACCESS) | ||
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "4.21.0") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "4.21.0") | |
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "4.24.0") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "4.21.0") | |
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "24.0") |
actually (by now)
| private Boolean specifyIpRanges; | ||
|
|
||
| @SerializedName(ApiConstants.VPC_ACCESS) | ||
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "4.21.0") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "4.21.0") | |
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "4.23.0") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "4.21.0") | |
| @Param(description = "Whether the calling account has access to this network's VPC", since = "24.0") |
| @Param(description = "True if Network supports specifying IP ranges, false otherwise") | ||
| private Boolean specifyIpRanges; | ||
|
|
||
| @SerializedName(ApiConstants.VPC_ACCESS) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we not get this information from network owner? I don't think these response params are needed and UI can probably get these values at runtime based on the caller and AI response data
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If it is absolutely neede than I think better structure would be to return - vpcaccount or vpcaccountid and vpcdomainid
13 participants
Description
This PR adds the "ownership selection" UI fields to VPC tiers and VPC public IPs.
The "vpcAccess" response attribute was added so the UI can know if the caller has access to the VPC without needing to make a whole new request. This is needed to avoid 404 links (since router.resolve is assembled through API permissions) and so the UI can present the correct public IPs to their possible network tiers (e.g. if the User has tiers of two different VPCs, they can't use one's public IP in the other).
Types of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity
Feature/Enhancement Scale
Bug Severity
Screenshots (if appropriate):
New tier possible owners' listing
Tier listing
User accessing their tier of the Admin's VPC
Possible owners for new IP
How Has This Been Tested?
Environment with domains Root (with accounts Root Admin and User), Root/1 (with a Domain Admin), Root/A (with a Domain Admin) and Root/A/B (with a Domain Admin and a User). There is a Project in each domain, owned by the respective admins.
How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?