May 2020 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[stein][neutron] gratuitous arp
by Ignazio Cassano 14 May '21

14 May '21

Hello, I have a problem on stein neutron. When a vm migrate from one node to another I cannot ping it for several minutes. If in the vm I put a script that ping the gateway continously, the live migration works fine and I can ping it. Why this happens ? I read something about gratuitous arp. Please, help me ? Any workaround , please ? Best Regards Ignazio

3 33

Re: [openstack-dev] Are we ready to put stable/ocata into extended maintenance mode?
by Alex Schultz 03 Mar '21

03 Mar '21

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 1:30 PM Alex Schultz <aschultz(a)redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Matt Riedemann <mriedemos(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > The release page says Ocata is planned to go into extended maintenance mode > > on Aug 27 [1]. There really isn't much to this except it means we don't do > > releases for Ocata anymore [2]. There is a caveat that project teams that do > > not wish to maintain stable/ocata after this point can immediately end of > > life the branch for their project [3]. We can still run CI using tags, e.g. > > if keystone goes ocata-eol, devstack on stable/ocata can still continue to > > install from stable/ocata for nova and the ocata-eol tag for keystone. > > Having said that, if there is no undue burden on the project team keeping > > the lights on for stable/ocata, I would recommend not tagging the > > stable/ocata branch end of life at this point. > > > > So, questions that need answering are: > > > > 1. Should we cut a final release for projects with stable/ocata branches > > before going into extended maintenance mode? I tend to think "yes" to flush > > the queue of backports. In fact, [3] doesn't mention it, but the resolution > > said we'd tag the branch [4] to indicate it has entered the EM phase. > > > > 2. Are there any projects that would want to skip EM and go directly to EOL > > (yes this feels like a Monopoly question)? > > > > I believe TripleO would like to EOL instead of EM for Ocata as > indicated by the thead > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-September/134671.ht… > Bringing this backup to see what we need to do to get the stable/ocata branches ended for the TripleO projects. I'm bringing this up because we have https://review.openstack.org/#/c/647009/ which is for the upcoming rename but CI is broken and we have no interest in continue to keep the stable/ocata branches alive (or fix ci for them). Thanks, -Alex > Thanks, > -Alex > > > [1] https://releases.openstack.org/ > > [2] > > https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintena… > > [3] > > https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#extended… > > [4] > > https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20180301-stable-branch-eol.… > > > > -- > > > > Thanks, > > > > Matt > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

5 11

Fwd: [MURANO] DevStack Murano "yaql_function" Error
by İzzettin Erdem 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Thanks Andy. Regards. Forwarded Conversation Subject: [MURANO] DevStack Murano "yaql_function" Error ------------------------ Gönderen: Andy Botting <andy(a)andybotting.com> Date: 30 Nis 2020 Per, 14:13 To: İzzettin Erdem <root.mch(a)gmail.com> Cc: Rong Zhu <aaronzhu1121(a)gmail.com>, < openstack-discuss(a)lists.openstack.org> Hi İzzettin, Thanks for your interest. Complete log link is at below. It is happening > when i try to deploy or update an environment. > > http://paste.openstack.org/show/792444/ > I've encountered the error AttributeError: 'method' object has no attribute '__yaql_function__' in our environment recently. I believe it started after we upgraded to the Stein release. I haven't tracked it down yet, but calls to the YAQL function: std:Project.getEnvironmentOwner() in a Murano app seem to generate it. It's good to know that at least someone else has reproduced this. cheers, Andy ---------- Gönderen: İzzettin Erdem <root.mch(a)gmail.com> Date: 2 May 2020 Cmt, 16:08 To: Andy Botting <andy(a)andybotting.com> Hi Andy, I solved this problem, it is happening when you try to create or update an environment on existing network. If you change the network with "create new" parameter, it stuck on "creating -or updating- environment" state and after that throws connection error. So i searched Murano network errors and i found this: https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E73172_01/E73173/html/issue-21976631.html. I applied these steps and i created successfully an environment just only with "create new" network parameter. After all these, i realized my devstack environment has no internet connection and because of this murano-agent could not install. So i tried to install Murano on my OSA stable/train test environment and i came with success until last step. Murano-agent installed but this time agent could not connect to rabbitmq instance. I discussed this with OSA IRC channel and i think i have to struggle with this for a long time. Apologize for this long mail but i wanted to inform you. Thanks. Regards. ---------- Gönderen: Andy Botting <andy(a)andybotting.com> Date: 3 May 2020 Paz, 14:24 To: İzzettin Erdem <root.mch(a)gmail.com> Hi İzzettin, Glad you got it sorted. I think you've probably just worked around the issue. Using your new method, you're probably just avoiding the std:Project.getEnvironmentOwner YAQL call now. I've also worked around it in our environment, but I'd like to solve it properly. When I get some time to look into it properly, I'll let you know. cheers, Andy

3 3

[ceilometer][octavia] polling meters
by Ionut Biru 14 Jul '20

14 Jul '20

Hello guys, I was trying to add in polling.yaml and pipeline from ceilometer the following: - network.services.lb.active.connections - network.services.lb.health_monitor - network.services.lb.incoming.bytes - network.services.lb.listener - network.services.lb.loadbalancer - network.services.lb.member - network.services.lb.outgoing.bytes - network.services.lb.pool - network.services.lb.total.connections But it doesn't work, I think they are for the old lbs that were supported in neutron. I found https://docs.openstack.org/ceilometer/latest/admin/telemetry-dynamic-pollst… but this is not available in stein or train. I was wondering if there is a way to meter loadbalancers from octavia. I mostly want for start to just meter if a loadbalancer was deployed and has status active. -- Ionut Biru - https://fleio.com

3 17

[all][stable] Moving the stable/ocata to 'Unmaintained' phase and then EOL
by Ghanshyam Mann 02 Jul '20

02 Jul '20

Hello Everyone, Ocata is in the 'Extended Maintenance' phase[1] but its gate is broken and difficult to fix now. The main issue started for gate is about Tempest and its deps constraint is correctly used on Ocata or not. We fixed most of those issues when things started failing during py2 drop[2]. But now things are broken due to newer stestr is installed in Ocata jobs[2]. As Sean also mentioned in this backport[4] that stestr is not constraint in Ocata[5] as it was not in g-r that time so cannot be added in u-c. Tempest old tag cannot be fixed to have that with cap on the tempest side. The only option left to unblock the gate is to remove the integration testing from Ocata gate. But it will untested after that as we cannot say unit testing is enough to mark it tested. At least from QA perspective, I would not say it is tested if there is no integration job running there. Keeping it untested (no integration testing) and saying it is Maintained in the community can be very confusing things. I think its time to move it to the 'Unmaintained' phase and then EOL. Thought? [1] https://releases.openstack.org/ [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:fix-stable-gate+(status:open+OR+status… [3] https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/e477d0919ff14eea9cd8a6235ea00c3d… [4] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/726931/ [5] https://opendev.org/openstack/requirements/src/branch/stable/ocata/upper-co… -gmann

8 12

[tc][election] campaign discussion: how TC can solve the less contributor issue?
by Ghanshyam Mann 23 Jun '20

23 Jun '20

This topic is a very important and critical area to solve in the OpenStack community. I personally feel and keep raising this issue wherever I get the opportunity. To develop or maintain any software, the very first thing we need is to have enough developer resources. Without enough developers (either open or closed source), none of the software can survive. OpenStack current situation on contributors is not the same as it was few years back. Almost every project is facing the less contributor issue as compare to requirements and incoming requests. Few projects already dead or going to be if we do not solve the less contributors issue now. I know, TC is not directly responsible to solve this issue but we should do something or at least find the way who can solve this. What do you think about what role TC can play to solve this? What platform or entity can be used by TC to raise this issue? or any new crazy Idea? -gmann

14 26

[all][InteropWG] Request to review tests your Distro for 2020.06 draft guidelines
by prakash RAMCHANDRAN 19 Jun '20

19 Jun '20

Hi all, Please review your tests for Draft 2020.06 guidelines to be proposed to Board.You can do that on and should start appearing in next 24-48 hours depending on Zuulhttps://refstack.openstack.org/#/community_results Plus please register for InteropWG PTG meet on June 1 st 6AM-*AM PDT slot See etherpadsPTG eventhttps://etherpad.opendev.org/p/interop_virtual_ptg_planning_june_2020S… invite Tempest, TC members, QA/API SIG teams, Edge SIG WG , Baremetal SIG (for Ironic), K8s SIG (for OoK / KoO) & Scientific SIG teams. Other discussions https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/interop2020 Welcome to join weekly Friday Meetings (Refer NA/EU/APJ in etherpad below) https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/interop Appreciate all support from committee and special appreciation to Mark T Voelker for providing the bridge.He has been immensely valuable in bringing as Vice Chair the wealth of history to enable this Interop WG. ThanksPrakash

2 3

Openstack user surver - questions
by Slawek Kaplonski 17 Jun '20

17 Jun '20

Hi, First of all sorry if I didn't look for it long enough but I have couple of questions about user surver and I couldn't find answer for them anywhere. 1. I was looking at [1] for some Neutron related data and I found only one questions about used backends in "Deployment Decisions". Problem is that this graph is for me a bit unreadable due to many things on x-axis which overlaps each other. Is there any place where I can find some "raw data" to check? 2. Another question about the same chart is: is there any way to maybe change possible replies in the surver for next years? I'm asking about that becasue I have a feeling that e.g. responses "Open vSwitch" and "ML2 - Open vSwitch" may be confusing for users. My understanding is that "Open vSwitch" means simply old "Open vSwitch" core plugin instead of ML2 plugin but this old plugin was removed around "Libery" cycle so I really don't think that still 37% of users are using it. 3. Is there any way to propose new, more detailed questions about e.g Neutron? For example what service plugins they are using. [1] https://www.openstack.org/analytics -- Slawek Kaplonski Senior software engineer Red Hat

2 4

[tc][uc][all] Starting community-wide goals ideas for V series
by Ghanshyam Mann 15 Jun '20

15 Jun '20

Hello everyone, We are in R14 week of Ussuri cycle which means It's time to start the discussions about community-wide goals ideas for the V series. Community-wide goals are important in term of solving and improving a technical area across OpenStack as a whole. It has lot more benefits to be considered from users as well from a developers perspective. See [1] for more details about community-wide goals and process. We have the Zuulv3 migration goal already accepted and pre-selected for v cycle. If you are interested in proposing a goal, please write down the idea on this etherpad[2] - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-v-series-goals Accordingly, we will start the separate ML discussion over each goal idea. Also, you can refer to the backlogs of community-wide goals from this[3] and ussuri cycle goals[4]. NOTE: TC has defined the goal process schedule[5] to streamlined the process and ready with goals for projects to plan/implement at the start of the cycle. I am hoping to start that schedule for W cycle goals. [1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/index.html [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-v-series-goals [3] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/community-goals [4] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PVG-u-series-goals [5] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/#goal-selection-schedule -gmann

10 22

[all][infra] Upcoming removal of preinstalled pip and virtualenv from base images
by Ian Wienand 15 Jun '20

15 Jun '20

Hello, This is to notify the community of the planned upcoming removal of the "pip-and-virtualenv" element from our infra image builds. This is part of the "cleanup test node python" spec documented at [1]. tl;dr ----- - pip and virtualenv tools will no longer be pre-installed on the base images we use for testing, but will be installed by jobs themselves. - most current jobs will depend on common Zuul base jobs that have been updated to install these tools already *i.e. in most cases there should be nothing to do* - in general, jobs should ensure they depend on roles that install these tools if they require them - if you do find your job failing due to the lack of either of these tools, use the ensure-pip or ensure-virtualenv roles provided in zuul-jobs - we have "-plain" node types that implement this now. If you think there might be a problem, switch the job to run run against one of these node types described below for testing. History ------- The "pip-and-virtualenv" element is part of diskimage-builder [2] and installs the latest version of pip and virtualenv, and related tools like setuptools, into the system environment for the daily builds. This has a long history of working around various issues, but has become increasingly problematic to maintain. One of the more noticable effects is that to prevent the distribution packages overwriting the upstream installs, we put various pip, setuptools and virtualenv packages on "hold" in CI images. This prevents tests resinstalling packaged tools which can create, in short, a big mess. Both destroying the extant environment and having the tools on hold have been problems for various projects at various times. Another other problem is what happens when you call "pip" or "virtualenv" has diverged. It used to be that "pip" would install the package under Python2, while pip3 would install under python3. However, modern distributions now have "pip" installing under Python 3. To keep having "pip" install Python 2 packages on these platforms is not just wrong, but drags in Python 2 dependences to our images that aren't required. The addition of Python 3's venv and the split with virtualenv makes things even more confusing again. Future ------ As famously said "the only winning move is not to play". [3] By dropping this element, images will not have non-packaged pip/virtualenv/setuptools/etc. pre-installed. No packages will be on hold. The "ensure-pip" role [4] will ensure that dependencies for "pip:" commands will work. Because of the way base jobs are setup, it is most likely that this role has already run. If you wish to use a virtual environment to install a tool, I would suggest using the "ensure_pip_virtualenv_cmd" this role exports. This will default to "python3 -m venv". An example is [5]. In a Python 3 word, you probably do not *need* virtualenv; "python3 -m venv" is available and works after the "ensure-pip" role is run. However, if you require some of the features that virtualenv provides that venv does not (explained at [6]) there is a role "ensure-virtualenv" [7]. For example, we do this on the devstack branches because it is common to use "virtualenv" there due to the long history [8]. If you need specific versions of pip or virtualenv, etc. beyond the system-packaged versions installed with the above, you should have your job configure these. There is absolutely no problem with jobs installing differing versions of pip/virtuatlenv/etc in any way they want -- we just don't want the base images to have any of that by default. Of course, you should consider if you're building/testing something that is actually useful outside the gate, but that is a global concern. Testing ------- We have built parallel nodes with the suffix "-plain" where you can test any jobs in the new environment. For example [9] speculatively tests devstack. The node types available are centos-7-plain centos-8-plain ubuntu-xenial-plain ubuntu-bionic-plain The newer focal images do not have pip pre-installed, neither do the faster moving Fedora images, any SUSE images, or any ARM64 images. Rollout ------- We would like to make the switch soon, to shake out any issues early in the cycle. This would mean on or about the 8th June. Thanks, -i [1] https://docs.opendev.org/opendev/infra-specs/latest/specs/cleanup-test-node… [2] https://opendev.org/openstack/diskimage-builder/src/branch/master/diskimage… [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames [4] https://zuul-ci.org/docs/zuul-jobs/python-roles.html#role-ensure-pip [5] https://opendev.org/zuul/zuul-jobs/src/branch/master/roles/bindep/tasks/ins… [6] https://virtualenv.pypa.io/en/latest/ [7] https://zuul-ci.org/docs/zuul-jobs/python-roles.html#role-ensure-virtualenv [8] https://opendev.org/openstack/devstack/commit/23cfb9e6ebc63a4da4577c0ef9e34… [9] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/712211/11/.zuul.yaml

3 3