Open Stack

That is correct, the address should be wrapped in a bracket. I would
suspect it might be an issue of the original input.

Specifically, from the original undercloud.conf file you posted to the
list.

local_ip = ca:ca:ca:9900::171/64

That seems wrong to me and it might actually be the fact that it is
provided with a subnet mask, but I'm no expert in this specifically.

 Honestly, if you really want to take the TripleO route, you should likely
consider exploring commercial support options. The community can only do so
much for you in terms of a project (TripleO) which is shutting down[0], and
wallaby[1][2] itself is in what is considered Extended Maintenance[3].

-Julia

[0]:
https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-February/032083.html
[1]: https://releases.openstack.org/
[2]: https://releases.openstack.org/#extended-maintenance-note
[3]:
https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintenance-phases


On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 9:25 PM Kushagr Gupta <kushagrguptasps.mun at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Team/Julia,
>
> Thank you for your constant help @Julia Kreger
> <juliaashleykreger at gmail.com>.
>
> We decided to install the wallaby release using online sources.
> We followed the link:
>
> https://docs.openstack.org/project-deploy-guide/tripleo-docs/wallaby/deployment/install_undercloud.html
>
> When the installation of the undercloud was successful, We found out that
> all the containers except ironic_pxe_http were in healthy state as opposed
> to the mentioned container which was in an unhealthy state.
> We collected  the pcap files during the node introspection at this point,
> and following is our result:
>
> [trim]

> As you can see, we are getting a read request from our baremetal node, but
> our tftp server is not replying with the acknowledgement message.
> We have seen in normal cases that at this point data transfer should begin
> which is not happening here.
>
> Apart from this the container ironic_pxe_http is an unhealthy state as
> mentioned previously. On inspecting the pod, we are getting the following
> error:
>
> ```
> "Log": [
>                          {
>                               "Start":
> "2023-08-22T13:03:17.113762224+05:30",
>                               "End": "2023-08-22T13:03:17.400862661+05:30",
>                               "ExitCode": 1,
>                               "Output": "/usr/sbin/httpd
> -DFOREGROUND\ncurl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404 Not
> Found\n\n404 ca:ca:ca:9900::43:8088 0.000512 seconds"
>                          },
> ```
> We think that ca:ca:ca:9900::43:8088 is not a valid syntax. For IPV6 ips,
> it should be [ca:ca:ca:9900::43]:8088. Kindly note that this is our
> assumption.
> Could you please help us out with it?
>
> Thanks and Regards,
> Kushagra Gupta
>
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 2:44 AM Julia Kreger <juliaashleykreger at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>> [trim]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20230825/3bacd177/attachment.htm>