Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add more functions for OpenVSwitch #50564

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Nov 27, 2018

Conversation

smarsching
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

This PR makes changes to the openvswitch_bridge state and the openvswitch execution module it also introduces a new openvswitch_db state module.

Changes to salt.modules.openvswitch:

  • The bridge_create function has two new (optional) parameters. By specifying these parameters, one can create a "fake bridge" that represents a certain VLAN on a regular bridge.
  • The db_get function has been added. It provides a way to read a value directly from the OpenVSwitch database, thus giving access to nearly every aspect of the OpenVSwitch configuration.
  • The db_set function has been added. It provides a way to write a value directly to the OpenVSwitch database, thus giving access to nearly every aspect of the OpenVSwitch configuration.

Changes to salt.states.openvswitch_bridge:

  • The present function has two new (optional) parameters. By specifying these parameters, one can create a "fake bridge" that represents a certain VLAN on a regular bridge.

New module salt.states.openvswitch_db:

  • Provides a managed function that helps one ensure that certain columns of a record in the OpenVSwitch database have certain values. For example, this can be used to set a fixed MAC address for an "internal" interface.

Tests written?

No

Commits signed with GPG?

No

@cachedout
Copy link
Contributor

@jirikotlin can you help us review this?

@cachedout cachedout merged commit 57674c3 into saltstack:develop Nov 27, 2018
@smarsching
Copy link
Contributor Author

It looks like this never got carried from develop to master. Was this just overlooked or is there a reason for that?

@sagetherage
Copy link
Contributor

@smarsching simply have not cleaned up -- thank you!!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants