aci_domain: Manage phys, vmm, l2ext, l3ext and FC domain profiles

[dagwieers]

SUMMARY

A new ACI module to manage physical, virtual, external bridged, external routed and fibre channel domain profiles.

This module still needs integration tests once it is formally review and accepted.

ISSUE TYPE

• New Module Pull Request

COMPONENT NAME

aci_domain

ANSIBLE VERSION

v2.5

[ansibot]

cc @brunocalogero @jmcgill298 @schunduri
click here for bot help

[dagwieers]

cc @rsmeyers @nilloBE Please test and review !

[ansibot]

@brunocalogero @jmcgill298 @schunduri

As a maintainer of a module in the same namespace this new module has been submitted to, your vote counts for shipits. Please review this module and add shipit if you would like to see it merged.

click here for bot help

[gundalow]

I don't see anything obviously wrong. If people are happy then will need EXAMPLES, RETURNS and tests.

[rsmeyers]

Not sure if we should provide the option via this way to create a VMM domain, as it opens up a certain complexity. I would only add vmm here when we covered the full use-case.

[dagwieers]

Can you elaborate about the full use case ?

If we don't do it this way, it means having 5 aci_*_domain modules here, and another 5 for aci_eap_to_*_domain , another 5 for aci_epg_to_*_domain and 5 more aci_*_domain_to_vlan_pool. I prefer adding domain_type and vm_provider and leave it at one module each

[rsmeyers]

I agree that having it in 1 module is great, but I would currently remove the option to create a vmm domain our of this module, the reason is that when you create a VMM domain, we need to create 10 more objects for which we need to create more ansible modules..., which is currently not the plan, so it won't be feasible anyway to use this module to create a vmm domain...

[dagwieers]

Merging, integration tests and examples follow...

[nilloBE]

I do not know if there is enough to test at the moment. For physical and external domains this is fine. For VMM domains we need to be able to specify all required parameters. This is dependent on the domain type (vmware, redhat, microsoft). I believe it would be great to add to the module.

For VMware:

• domain_name
• vswitch_type: [vds, avs, ave]
• access_mode: [ro, rw]
• vcenter_name
• vcenter_ip: [ip or FQDN]
• vds_version: [5.1, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5, default]
• stats_collection: [disabled, enabled]
• datacenter_name
• mgmt_epg
• credential_name
• port_channel_mode: [on, lacp-active,lacp-passive,mac-pining,mac-pinning-plus]
• vswitch_policy: [cdp, lldp, none]

For RHV:

• domain_name
• rhvm_name
• rhvm_ip: [ip or FQDN]
• datacenter_name
• mgmt_epg
• credential_name

For Microsoft:

• domain_name
• scvmm_name
• scvmm_ip: [ip or FQDN]
• scvmm_cloud_name
• port_channel_mode: [on, lacp-active,lacp-passive,mac-pining,mac-pinning-plus]

let me know if you need more info or disagree :)

[rsmeyers]

Due to the amount of modules we had to make, we limited this module and didn’t include VMM.
In a next phase for sure we need to add this.
Let’s docment the limitation of this module currently.

[dagwieers]

So, it's not easy to add conditional parameters, another solution may be needed.

PS I would like to see a new open issue rather than comments in a closed PR which is not tracked.

[nilloBE]

Fair enough. I will add a new issue to track this. We can then decide whether we want to keep it as a single module or not.