Implement policy edge resource #1544
Conversation
ksamoray
force-pushed
the
policy_edge
branch
3 times, most recently
from
c065805 to
e91adb2
Compare
| "static_ipv6_pool": { | ||
| Type: schema.TypeString, | ||
| Description: "IP assignment specification for Static IPv6 Pool. Input can be MP ip pool UUID or policy path of IP pool", | ||
| Optional: true, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we enforce policy path here? No reason to use MP pool id (same for ipv4)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense - the MP pool id capability is provided by NSX (the description is the API's)
| MinItems: 1, | ||
| Elem: &schema.Resource{ | ||
| Schema: map[string]*schema.Schema{ | ||
| "overlay_transport_zone_path": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lets use getPolicyPathSchema? Or validatePolicyPath
| Optional: true, | ||
| Elem: &schema.Schema{ | ||
| Type: schema.TypeString, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we validatePolicyPath here as well?
| Required: true, | ||
| Description: "Storage/datastore identifier in the specified vcenter server", | ||
| }, | ||
| "vc_id": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this compute manager id?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed - that's how they named this in API. Maybe it's worthwhile to rename this to compute_manager_id for consistency?
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
| creds := make(map[string]interface{}) | ||
| creds["audit_password"] = obj.AuditPassword |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are passwords present in response? This smells like permadiff potential
| * `failure_domain_path` - (Optional) Path of the failure domain. | ||
| * `form_factor` - (Optional) Appliance form factor. Valid values - 'SMALL', 'MEDIUM', 'LARGE', 'XLARGE'. The default value is 'MEDIUM'. | ||
| * `hostname` - (Required) Host name or FQDN for edge node. | ||
| * `management_interface` - (Optional) Applicable For LCM managed Node and contains the management interface info. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
judging from the code, this supports two assignments (I'm guessing v4 and v6) - lets mention this here
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| "uplink_host_switch_profile_path": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
validatePolicyPath here and below?
Also those might be auto-assigned to default profile, in which case Computed is needed
ksamoray
force-pushed
the
policy_edge
branch
7 times, most recently
from
4b50ece to
6c62f88
Compare
Signed-off-by: Kobi Samoray <[email protected]>
ksamoray
force-pushed
the
policy_edge
branch
from
6c62f88 to
ae6c9b8
Compare
For NSX v9.0, transport node API is deprecated and replaced with policy API which provides extra functionality.