CloudStack DNS framework - Integrate PowerDNS as first plugin by sudo87 · Pull Request #12737 · apache/cloudstack

sudo87 · 2026-03-03T11:49:04Z

Description

This PR introduces initial implementation for a plugin based DNS framework in Apache CloudStack. It enables both admin and end-users to manage DNS zones and record with external authoritative dns providers.

First supported DNS provider: PowerDNS

Github issue: #9958
Cwiki: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/DNS+Framework+and+Plugins
Doc PR: apache/cloudstack-documentation#646

Terminology:

DNS Server: integration between CloudStack and DNS provider
DNS Zone: Domain scope
DNS Record: mapping entry with dns zones (e.g. mapping between names and ip)

API Changes

There are following APIs have been introduced to support DNS management from CloudStack and Instance auto registration:

[add/update/delete]DnsServer
[create/update/delete]DnsZone
[create/delete]DnsRecord
[associate/disassociate]DnsZoneToNetwork

UI changes

DNS Server subsection under Network
DNS Zone subsection under Network
DNS records management tab in the Dns Zone

Supported network for Auto Registration: Shared network

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

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

…teDnsServer

2. added relevant changes in dao and vo 3. worked on creatednszone, integration with mgr 4. powerdns create zone api call

1. creatednszone 2. listdnszone 3. updatednszone 4. deletednszone

1. Add dns server 2. create zone 3. add records 4. verify in powerdns 5. verify using dig

1. Registerdnsrecordforvm api 2. removednsrecordforvm api 3. cleanup; fixed license, dao logic

1. refactored client 2. added exceptions 3. enhanced updateZone 4. ownership check for deleteDnsServer

1. port for dns_server 2. remove hard coded localhost for server_id 3. resolve and store server id if not passed in the api request 4. restrict public dns_server for domain admins and admins

…n svc and handle dot version in client

…elete events 2. add dnsrecordurl in nic_details table 3. add dnsrecordurl in vm response

codecov · 2026-03-03T12:02:37Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 74.18363% with 672 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 20.40%. Comparing base (b7d4df0) to head (b9e52df).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
.../apache/cloudstack/dns/DnsProviderManagerImpl.java	77.90%	125 Missing and 54 partials ⚠️
...g/apache/cloudstack/dns/dao/NicDnsJoinDaoImpl.java	0.00%	56 Missing ⚠️
...ava/org/apache/cloudstack/dns/DnsProviderUtil.java	60.29%	37 Missing and 17 partials ⚠️
...apache/cloudstack/dns/powerdns/PowerDnsClient.java	79.43%	23 Missing and 28 partials ⚠️
...rg/apache/cloudstack/dns/dao/DnsServerDaoImpl.java	56.86%	43 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...rg/apache/cloudstack/dns/vo/DnsServerDetailVO.java	0.00%	37 Missing ⚠️
...ava/org/apache/cloudstack/dns/vo/NicDnsJoinVO.java	0.00%	33 Missing ⚠️
.../src/main/java/com/cloud/vm/UserVmManagerImpl.java	48.07%	26 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...n/java/org/apache/cloudstack/dns/vo/DnsZoneVO.java	58.92%	21 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...pache/cloudstack/api/response/DnsZoneResponse.java	55.81%	18 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
... and 35 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #12737      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     20.14%   20.40%   +0.26%     
- Complexity    18477    18837     +360     
============================================
  Files          5751     5798      +47     
  Lines        519415   522015    +2600     
  Branches      60625    60894     +269     
============================================
+ Hits         104648   106536    +1888     
- Misses       403334   403934     +600     
- Partials      11433    11545     +112

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	`20.40% <74.18%> (+0.26%)`	⬆️

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.

github-actions · 2026-03-09T16:13:30Z

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

weizhouapache · 2026-06-23T14:38:12Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2026-06-23T14:40:06Z

@weizhouapache 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 · 2026-06-23T15:57:04Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 18349

DaanHoogland · 2026-06-24T05:51:23Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2026-06-24T05:52:03Z

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

blueorangutan · 2026-06-24T06:38:12Z

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-16419)

weizhouapache · 2026-06-24T09:06:19Z

@vladimirpetrov could you please share the test results ? thanks

@rajujith is it good to you ?

Copilot

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

github-actions · 2026-06-29T21:45:38Z

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

sudo87 · 2026-07-01T05:24:22Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2026-07-01T05:26:04Z

@sudo87 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 · 2026-07-01T06:23:12Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 18425

sudo87 · 2026-07-01T09:54:01Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2026-07-01T09:56:03Z

@sudo87 a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

blueorangutan · 2026-07-02T01:18:52Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-16456)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 52611 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr12737-t16456-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 151 look OK, 2 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
ContextSuite context=TestCloudStackDNSFramework>:setup	`Error`	0.00	test_dns_framework_powerdns.py
test_01_ssl_offloading_isolated_network	`Failure`	710.21	test_ssl_offloading.py

DaanHoogland · 2026-07-02T16:55:34Z

@weizhouapache @sudo87 , this came probably a bit early to be an extension type. Would it make sense to still invest in it, or to create a second phase where it can be implemented as extension?

github-actions · 2026-07-04T14:38:15Z

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

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 130 out of 131 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.

weizhouapache · 2026-07-06T08:19:04Z

@weizhouapache @sudo87 , this came probably a bit early to be an extension type. Would it make sense to still invest in it, or to create a second phase where it can be implemented as extension?

@DaanHoogland

Thanks for the suggestion.

In my opinion, an external orchestration model for DNS is certainly feasible (e.g., via a generic DnsExtensionProvider that executes Python/shell scripts or other external tooling implementing the same DnsProvider contract).

However, DNS operations are comparatively simpler than VM, network, or storage orchestration. They are mostly CRUD-style operations (zones and records) without complex state machines or deep lifecycle management. Because of that, implementing DNS providers directly in Java as part of CloudStack is not particularly complex.

At the same time, a Java-based provider model is more consistent with existing CloudStack extension patterns and avoids introducing an additional execution layer (script-based dispatch), which can add operational overhead and reduce type safety and debuggability compared to native implementations.

So my view is that a Java DNS provider framework is the more natural fit for CloudStack, while an external execution-based provider model remains feasible for environments that specifically require script-based integration.

sudo87 added 22 commits February 9, 2026 10:52

wip: dns provider framework

7b9fc0e

add db schema, vo and dao classes

b2d597c

add powerdns module in plugins

6ef7f9b

Changes done to AddDnsServer, ListDnsServer, DeleteDnsServer and Upda…

9911c28

…teDnsServer

1. Setup Dns zone schema

df21318

2. added relevant changes in dao and vo 3. worked on creatednszone, integration with mgr 4. powerdns create zone api call

following dns zone apis are integrated:

f29b8be

1. creatednszone 2. listdnszone 3. updatednszone 4. deletednszone

Tested following flow:

9b77c37

1. Add dns server 2. create zone 3. add records 4. verify in powerdns 5. verify using dig

Add associate and disassociate zone to network APIs

c5972ae

following things are done:

99f8c7d

1. Registerdnsrecordforvm api 2. removednsrecordforvm api 3. cleanup; fixed license, dao logic

add missing license, cleanup, log std

e011ce1

following changes are done:

4a9f66d

1. refactored client 2. added exceptions 3. enhanced updateZone 4. ownership check for deleteDnsServer

include:

c64cf81

1. port for dns_server 2. remove hard coded localhost for server_id 3. resolve and store server id if not passed in the api request 4. restrict public dns_server for domain admins and admins

normalize dns zone and record in svc layer, always use dotless data i…

4df11a4

…n svc and handle dot version in client

enable apis for all roles

857436e

add ACL annotation, entitytype, minor cleanup

582b687

acl related changes, fixes, mistakes

add7763

fixes related to acl, dao

1fe79bd

add views for dns_server and dns_zone

6ca9d5a

Add Listener for VM lifecycle to add dnsrecords for associated dns zone

1c1eef3

1. implement event processing for vm start/stop/destroy, nic create/d…

caf8533

…elete events 2. add dnsrecordurl in nic_details table 3. add dnsrecordurl in vm response

starting on ui work

856158c

resolve merge conflict with main

928db65

boring-cyborg Bot added the component:api label Mar 3, 2026

fix lint issue

369bb16

winterhazel added this to the 4.23.0 milestone Mar 3, 2026

fix list dnsservers api, ui screens for dns servers, generate events

0df50ce

github-actions Bot added the status:has-conflicts label Mar 9, 2026

UI related work and fixes in updateDnsServer cmd

a9afbce

weizhouapache marked this pull request as ready for review June 24, 2026 09:06

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings June 24, 2026 09:06

Copilot AI reviewed Jun 24, 2026

github-actions Bot added the status:has-conflicts label Jun 29, 2026

resolve conflicts

cc4faae

github-actions Bot removed the status:has-conflicts label Jun 30, 2026

github-actions Bot added the status:has-conflicts label Jul 4, 2026

resolve conflicts

c0850de

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings July 6, 2026 04:08

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of sudo87 July 6, 2026 04:10 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jul 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot removed the status:has-conflicts label Jul 6, 2026

resolve copilot comments

b9e52df

Uh oh!

Conversation

sudo87 commented Mar 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Types of changes

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Mar 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Mar 9, 2026

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Uh oh!

sudo87 commented Jul 1, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Jul 1, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Jul 1, 2026

Uh oh!

sudo87 commented Jul 1, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Jul 1, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Jul 2, 2026

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Jul 2, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Jul 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

sudo87 commented Mar 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Mar 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading