Allow privateips on console proxy

[GaOrtiga]

Description

Currently the configuration consoleproxy.url.domain only accepts domain names as a valid value; however, some users have reported the desire to use private IPs as a value for this configuration. This is useful for CI implementation and local labs.

The main goal of this PR is to allow operators to use IPs as valid configurations as well.

The validations for the configuration values have also been refactored into new methods to facilitate unity tests and clean up the code.

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)

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• Major
• Minor

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #6808 (ddfdae4) into main (95074f6) will increase coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 79.68%.

❗ Current head ddfdae4 differs from pull request most recent head 49aba8e. Consider uploading reports for the commit 49aba8e to get more accurate results

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #6808      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     11.27%   11.31%   +0.04%     
- Complexity     7287     7336      +49     
============================================
  Files          2492     2494       +2     
  Lines        246805   246880      +75     
  Branches      38562    38567       +5     
============================================
+ Hits          27828    27940     +112     
+ Misses       215393   215344      -49     
- Partials       3584     3596      +12     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
.../cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java	12.49% <79.03%> (+1.24%)	⬆️
.../src/main/java/com/cloud/configuration/Config.java	89.73% <100.00%> (+0.52%)	⬆️
.../src/main/java/com/cloud/vm/UserVmManagerImpl.java	6.75% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
...in/java/com/cloud/server/ManagementServerImpl.java	5.19% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
...n/java/com/cloud/vm/VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...va/com/cloud/deploy/DeploymentPlanningManager.java	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...k/engine/cloud/entity/api/VMEntityManagerImpl.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...stack/affinity/NonStrictHostAffinityProcessor.java	71.79% <0.00%> (ø)
...k/affinity/NonStrictHostAntiAffinityProcessor.java	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 8 more

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

[DaanHoogland]

small issues with the code so far.

[DaanHoogland]

@GaOrtiga dio you expect to have this finished/ready for review in the coming weeks?

[GaOrtiga]

@DaanHoogland Yes, I will probably have it ready by the next week.

[sonarcloud]

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.   

1 Bug
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
270 Code Smells

34.6% Coverage
0.0% Duplication

[DaanHoogland]

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.

1 Bug 0 Vulnerabilities 0 Security Hotspots 270 Code Smells

34.6% Coverage 0.0% Duplication

@GaOrtiga 270 code smells seems a bit daunting. Are you still working on this?

[DaanHoogland]

@GaOrtiga as this is still in draft, should it be pushed to a later milestone? i.e. 4.19?

[GaOrtiga]

@GaOrtiga as this is still in draft, should it be pushed to a later milestone? i.e. 4.19?

Sorry about the delay to finish this, while creating the tests I found the error that was fixed here: #6910
This error needed to be fixed in order for the tests to run, so now that the fix was merged I came back for this PR.
I believe I have finished the changes, it is working as expected so far.
Will just run some more tests and hopefully take out of draft this week.

[sonarcloud]

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
268 Code Smells

60.8% Coverage
0.0% Duplication

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@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.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 5033

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan test

[blueorangutan]

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

[DaanHoogland]

clgtm, but a license header is needed/missing

[blueorangutan]

Trillian test result (tid-5589)
Environment: kvm-centos7 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server 7
Total time taken: 40424 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr6808-t5589-kvm-centos7.zip
Smoke tests completed. 105 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File

[DaanHoogland]

clgtm

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan test keepEnv

[blueorangutan]

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

[blueorangutan]

Trillian test result (tid-5596)
Environment: kvm-centos7 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server 7
Total time taken: 41787 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr6808-t5596-kvm-centos7.zip
Smoke tests completed. 105 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File

[JoaoJandre]

LGTM

[RodrigoDLopez]

LGTM.
Tested locally and everything work like a charm

[DaanHoogland]

@GaOrtiga,
Do you plan to document this? (in https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation)?
And do you plan to apply @RodrigoDLopez 'extra space suggestion?

[GaOrtiga]

@DaanHoogland

Do you plan to document this?
Initially I did not plan on documenting since it is not a major change, but I can do it.

And do you plan to apply @RodrigoDLopez 'extra space suggestion?
I applied the suggestion, is there a concern regarding it?

[DaanHoogland]

@DaanHoogland

Do you plan to document this? Initially I did not plan on documenting since it is not a major change, but I can do it.

And do you plan to apply @RodrigoDLopez 'extra space suggestion? I applied the suggestion, is there a concern regarding it?

No concerns, I just wodered what to test/look for. I'm fine with merging as is but I think it will not be for those that do not know beforehand what to expect, so if you an find any documentation on the console proxy domain configuration it would be nice if you can add it.

[GaOrtiga]

@DaanHoogland
I applied one of the suggestions but forgot to update the tests with the current text. Now this test is broken, so, should we revert it or create a fix?

[weizhouapache]

@DaanHoogland I applied one of the suggestions but forgot to update the tests with the current text. Now this test is broken, so, should we revert it or create a fix?

@GaOrtiga
I just faced the same issue.
please create a pull request to fix the test asap

[GaOrtiga]

I created the PR #7018
Sorry for the mistake.

[weizhouapache]

no worries @GaOrtiga
pr has been mergd.