Allow deploy of VRs on dedicated resources

[GaOrtiga]

Description

Currently, it is not possible to deploy VRs on dedicated resources, even if they are dedicated to the domain in which the VR will be created.

A new global configuration allowRoutersOnDedicatedResources has been created to allow VRs to be deployed on hosts, clusters, pods and zones that are dedicated to their respective domains.

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

How Has This Been Tested?

With the configuration marked as true:

• I dedicated resources to the domain in which the VRs would be deployd and verified that the deploy worked normally.
• I dedicated resources to an account in that domain and verified that I could not deploy VRs on these resources.
• I dedicated resources to a different domain and verified that I could not deploy VRs on these resources.

I marked the configuration as false and verified that I could not deploy VRs on any of the dedicated resources.

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@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]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 3.51%. Comparing base (3166e64) to head (5a27a77).
⚠️ Report is 90 commits behind head on main.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (3166e64) and HEAD (5a27a77). Click for more details.

HEAD has 1 upload less than BASE

Flag	BASE (3166e64)	HEAD (5a27a77)
unittests	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #9531       +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     18.01%   3.51%   -14.50%     
============================================
  Files          6029     469     -5560     
  Lines        542160   40471   -501689     
  Branches      66451    7615    -58836     
============================================
- Hits          97682    1424    -96258     
+ Misses       433461   38856   -394605     
+ Partials      11017     191    -10826     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	3.51% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
unittests	?

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 12358

[nicoschmdt]

Hey @DaanHoogland, could we run the CI on this PR?

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan test

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

[blueorangutan]

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-12421)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 58187 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr9531-t12421-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 139 look OK, 2 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_11_isolated_network_with_dynamic_routed_mode	Error	2.29	test_ipv4_routing.py
test_12_vpc_and_tier_with_dynamic_routed_mode	Error	1.41	test_ipv4_routing.py
test_12_vpc_and_tier_with_dynamic_routed_mode	Error	1.41	test_ipv4_routing.py
test_12_start_vm_multiple_volumes_allocated	Error	20.01	test_vm_life_cycle.py

[github-actions]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[nicoschmdt]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@nicoschmdt 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.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 13280

[github-actions]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[winterhazel]

@GaOrtiga could you have a look at the conflicts?

[GaOrtiga]

@rajujith @sureshanaparti @winterhazel

Sorry for the delay, this was on my backlog.

I had to to some adjustments to address some use cases that were brought up, but now its ready for review/testing.

[GaOrtiga]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@GaOrtiga 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.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 18113

[DaanHoogland]

clgtm, (one style remark)

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland 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.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 18276

[DaanHoogland]

clgtm

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan test

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

[blueorangutan]

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-16358)