[openstack-dev] [keystone] Do we really need two listening ports ?

Monty Taylor mordred at inaugust.com
Wed Feb 1 16:25:49 UTC 2017


On 02/01/2017 09:35 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 6:59 AM Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org
> <mailto:zigo at debian.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On 02/01/2017 10:54 AM, Attila Fazekas wrote:
>     > Hi all,
>     >
>     > Typically we have two keystone service listening on two separate ports
>     > 35357 and 5000.
>     >
>     > Historically one of the port had limited functionality, but today I do
>     > not see why we want
>     > to have two separate service/port from the same code base for similar
>     > purposes.
> 
> 
> If you're running v2, you do need two endpoints (admin and public;
> keystone does not really have a use case for an internal endpoint). The
> specific port numbers don't particularly matter (other than 35357 is
> conveniently registered with IANA) and should not be hardcoded or
> assumed by clients (and are not, AFAIK). In the case of v2, it is
> effectively a different service running on each port; there's at least
> one unfortunately subtle difference in behavior between admin and public.
> 
> If you're *only* running v3, you can run a single process and put the
> same endpoint URL in the service catalog, for both the admin and public
> endpoint. Arbitrary ports don't matter (so just use 443).

Yes. Please just use 443. The entire idea from the early days of
OpenStack of these services having their own ports is one of the
craziest and crack-addled ideas that OpenStack ever had and should die a
violent death as soon as humanly possible.

> 
>     >
>     > Effective we use double amount of memory than it is really required,
>     > because both port is served by completely different worker instances,
>     > typically from the same physical server.
>     >
>     > I wonder, would it be difficult to use only a single port or at least
>     > the same pool of workers for all keystone(identity, auth..) purposes?
>     >
>     > Best Regards,
>     > Attila
> 
>     This has been discussed and agreed a long time ago, but nobody did the
>     work.
> 
> 
> A lot of work has gone into freeing keystone from having to run on two
> ports (Adam Young, in particular, deserves a ton of credit here). You
> just need to consume that operational flexibility.
>  
> 
>     Please do get rid of the 2nd port. And when you're at it, also get
>     rid of the admin and internal endpoint in the service catalog.
> 
> 
> v3 has never presumed anything other than a public endpoint. Admin and
> internal are strictly optional and only exist for backwards
> compatibility with v2 (so, just use v3).
>  
> 
>      
> 
> 
>     Cheers,
> 
>     Thomas Goirand (zigo)
> 
> 
>     __________________________________________________________________________
>     OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>     Unsubscribe:
>     OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>     <http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> -- 
> -Dolph
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 




More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list