<div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Dear All,</span><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">My Name is
Yogaratnam Rahulan. I am a member of the OpenStack community. I work for
University of Surrey 5G Innovation Centre. At the university I work with many
industrial mobile partners to integrate OTS software from Vodafone, EE,
Telefonica, Huawei, Samsung, Fujitsu and other Eu universities etc. involved in
the 5G telecoms world) onto open source infrastructure.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">We are evaluating
the ease of using Open Source components for 5G. I run the NFV-SDN team
at the university.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">I am mailing to you
today as I have a request to make regarding OpenStack and ODL integration.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">We are using
OpenStack and OpenDaylight for our NFV-SDN operation running with CentOS
operating system and are demonstrating state of the art communications core
networks on our virtualised testbed in order to progress standardised mobile
communications for the next generation beyond 4G LTE.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">We want to promote
open source platform use, particularly OpenStack and we had been running with
OpenStack and OpenDaylight and had demonstrated many major steps toward 5G core
network infrastructure up until mid of December 2016, without issue. <span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">However, we wanted
to upgrade to Newton in 2017. So we started to re-install
our system. Now we have a problem with the integration of OpenStack and
OpenDaylight. We are using ODL(Beryllium) but not be able to succeed with the
ODL as layer 3 forwarding integration. <span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Can you please
direct me to the right person(s) in the community to contact regarding this
issues as we really need more help to resolve and progress in this respect and
continue to promote open source virtualisation into the telecoms industry using
Open Stack. … willing to get involved and work with you folks, but
urgently need to progress.<span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Kind Regards</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Rahulan</span></p></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:00 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:openstack-operators-request@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">openstack-operators-request@lists.openstack.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send OpenStack-operators mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/<wbr>openstack-operators</a><br>
<br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:openstack-operators-request@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators-request@<wbr>lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:openstack-operators-owner@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators-owner@<wbr>lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of OpenStack-operators digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: Sharing fernet tokens (Matt Fischer)<br>
2. [nova] FYI: live_migration_progress_<wbr>timeout will default to 0<br>
and be deprecated in Ocata (Matt Riedemann)<br>
3. Re: [LCOO] Intro to Large Contributing (Jeremy Stanley)<br>
4. Re: [LCOO] Intro to Large Contributing (Hayes, Graham)<br>
5. Re: [nova] FYI: live_migration_progress_<wbr>timeout will default<br>
to 0 and be deprecated in Ocata (David Medberry)<br>
6. [nova] Next minimum libvirt version (Matt Riedemann)<br>
7. Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Next minimum libvirt version<br>
(Steve Gordon)<br>
8. Re: [nova] FYI: live_migration_progress_<wbr>timeout will default<br>
to 0 and be deprecated in Ocata (Belmiro Moreira)<br>
9. neutron-server high cpu usage (David Riedl)<br>
10. Re: neutron-server high cpu usage (Kevin Benton)<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>----------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 08:19:23 -0700<br>
From: Matt Fischer <<a href="mailto:matt@mattfischer.com">matt@mattfischer.com</a>><br>
To: Ignazio Cassano <<a href="mailto:ignaziocassano@gmail.com">ignaziocassano@gmail.com</a>><br>
Cc: OpenStack Operators <<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Sharing fernet tokens<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAHr1CO-<wbr>V0QrAOAkYR1JQp825ZrAmpxGVnxRtW<wbr>z8=-<a href="mailto:cYEE9BDAA@mail.gmail.com">cYEE9BDAA@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Please reply all to the list rather than emailing me directly.<br>
<br>
Key rotation is done with a keystone-manage command or we just end up<br>
effectively renumbering the keys with our deploy process.<br>
<br>
I'd recommend you watch our presentation from the Austin summit or read my<br>
blog posts on this.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.mattfischer.com/blog/?p=648" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.mattfischer.com/<wbr>blog/?p=648</a><br>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=702SRZHdNW8" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?<wbr>v=702SRZHdNW8</a><br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Matt Fischer <<a href="mailto:matt@mattfischer.com">matt@mattfischer.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> I think that you just replied to me directly. But you are asking about<br>
> sharing keys.<br>
><br>
> Since keys do not need to be in-sync on all nodes at the same time you can<br>
> use any number of sharing mechanisms. We used puppet + ansible (our normal<br>
> deploy process). Key rotation allows them to be out of sync which<br>
> simplifies the problem for you.<br>
><br>
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Matt Fischer <<a href="mailto:matt@mattfischer.com">matt@mattfischer.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Do you mean sharing tokens or keys?<br>
>><br>
>> On Feb 7, 2017 11:34 AM, "Ignazio Cassano" <<a href="mailto:ignaziocassano@gmail.com">ignaziocassano@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> Hi everybody,<br>
>>> Can anyone talk me about Sebring fernet tokens in an openstack with more<br>
>>> than one controller?<br>
>>> Regards<br>
>>> Ignazio<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
>>> OpenStack-operators mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/<wbr>openstack-operators</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20170209/caf039a1/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>pipermail/openstack-operators/<wbr>attachments/20170209/caf039a1/<wbr>attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 10:29:14 -0600<br>
From: Matt Riedemann <<a href="mailto:mriedemos@gmail.com">mriedemos@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>><br>
Subject: [Openstack-operators] [nova] FYI:<br>
live_migration_progress_<wbr>timeout will default to 0 and be deprecated in<br>
Ocata<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:42db0239-4235-4fff-36c9-7f15abae9ba7@gmail.com">42db0239-4235-4fff-36c9-<wbr>7f15abae9ba7@gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
This is just a heads up to anyone running with this since Liberty, there<br>
is a patch [1] that will go into Ocata which deprecates the<br>
live_migration_progress_<wbr>timeout config option used in the libvirt<br>
driver. The default value will also change to 0, effectively disabling<br>
the feature. See the patch and related bug report for more details.<br>
<br>
If you've seen issues trying to use this feature, and can confirm this<br>
or think it's actually wrong, please speak up soon (final Nova ocata tag<br>
is on 2/16).<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/429798/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#<wbr>/c/429798/</a><br>
<br>
--<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Matt Riedemann<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 16:29:52 +0000<br>
From: Jeremy Stanley <<a href="mailto:fungi@yuggoth.org">fungi@yuggoth.org</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:user-committee@lists.openstack.org">user-committee@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [LCOO] Intro to Large Contributing<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:20170209162952.GQ12827@yuggoth.org">20170209162952.GQ12827@<wbr>yuggoth.org</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
On 2017-02-09 00:59:52 +0000 (+0000), UKASICK, ANDREW wrote:<br>
[...]<br>
> I'm the mysterious "AndyU" who was chatting with you about a year<br>
> ago in IRC with questions about how to go about donating hosted<br>
> cloud resources for use by the Infra team. It's nice to bump into<br>
> you again! ;-) That idea is still stirring btw, but has been much<br>
> slower moving than I'd hoped.<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
Always appreciated, and happy to pick that back up if and when<br>
you're ready.<br>
<br>
> I've been having a pretty lengthy conversation with jay Pipes<br>
> regarding similar questions. You can catch up on that in the<br>
> thread below this one.<br>
<br>
I've been following it closely, and tried not to duplicate<br>
questions/comments as much as possible.<br>
<br>
> LCOO is unlike any other working groups that I'm familiar with in<br>
> some significant ways. You zero'd in on one of those in your<br>
> statements above about companies joining as opposed to<br>
> individuals. In that regard, LCOO is similar to an entity like<br>
> OSIC.org as opposed to a traditional working group.<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
This is probably where some of the confusion comes in for me; I<br>
expect it's just one of terminology/semantics. The OpenStack User<br>
Committee has specifically tied "Active members and contributors to<br>
functional teams and/or working groups" to its electorate in their<br>
charter, and also defines working groups as "teams" (which to me<br>
implies they're made up of individuals, not organizations):<br>
<br>
<a href="https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/charter.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://governance.openstack.<wbr>org/uc/reference/charter.html</a><br>
<br>
Maybe LCOO is something other than a "working group" in the formal<br>
UC sense? Or maybe the organizations who participate in the LCOO<br>
designate representatives (those LCOO "organization coordinators"<br>
and "governance board" mentioned in your wiki article) who are the<br>
actual working group as far as the UC is concerned? I'm just<br>
concerned if, for example, all employees within AT&T suddenly become<br>
part of the UC electorate by way of AT&T as an organization being an<br>
active "member" of an official UC working group. The only way I can<br>
really see this working is if the UC insists that its working groups<br>
are made up of individuals and not whole organizations.<br>
<br>
> Jira provides Kanban boards that can serve as a kind of dashboard<br>
> allowing us to visualize activity and current status of Community<br>
> activity. But that activity is still happening in Launchpad,<br>
> Gerrit, etc.<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
Cool, so it sounds like StoryBoard may work out for you in the<br>
long-run. It already has kanban and worklist support with optional<br>
automation tied directly to defect/feature tracking and code review.<br>
As the current effort to move our community from <a href="http://launchpad.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">launchpad.net</a> to<br>
<a href="http://storyboard.openstack.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">storyboard.openstack.org</a> progresses over the next couple of<br>
development cycles, I encourage you to check it out and start<br>
thinking about whether its features address your needs (or consider<br>
pitching in on further development there).<br>
<br>
> Automating the status updating is something I've begun to discuss<br>
> within the PWG's "Story Tracker" team. We have the same challenge<br>
> there.<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
Our hope is that once we get further along with the current<br>
migration blockers for StoryBoard, we'll implement an "epics"<br>
concept in it which ties individual stories and their tasksets to<br>
over-arching efforts where their progress can be tracked more<br>
holistically.<br>
<br>
> BTW, Atlassian has always made their tools free for use by open<br>
> source projects. Also, although they're commercial products they<br>
> do provide the source code and allow users to modify it freely<br>
> which makes them much more open-source-ish than most.<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
<soapbox><br>
Yes, I saw you mention it in the other ML thread. "Free as in beer"<br>
is a somewhat dirty concept in free software development circles,<br>
and our community infrastructure similarly eschews gratis services<br>
like GitHub in favor of libre alternatives (we provide read-only<br>
mirrors there on request, but don't rely on it in any of our<br>
automation and officially recommend <a href="http://git.openstack.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">git.openstack.org</a> which runs<br>
entirely on free software).<br>
<br>
As an author of free software myself I prefer when people use and<br>
help improve OpenStack rather than supporting commercial/proprietary<br>
solutions to accomplish the same tasks, and so think it hypocritical<br>
to not extend the same courtesy to other free software communities<br>
who are attempting to overcome similar hurdles in their respective<br>
problem spaces. To quote Harry Tuttle, "We're all in it together."<br>
</soapbox><br>
<br>
I understand you'll probably end up using whatever tools you're<br>
familiar/comfortable with and which help you accomplish your goals,<br>
I just ask that you keep in mind that publicly recommending non-free<br>
tools in the service of free software development sets an example.<br>
OpenStack already has a slightly negative reputation as "not really<br>
free" in the wider community... one which we're desperately trying<br>
to overcome, bit by bit.<br>
--<br>
Jeremy Stanley<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<br>
Name: signature.asc<br>
Type: application/pgp-signature<br>
Size: 949 bytes<br>
Desc: Digital signature<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20170209/afd5a1dd/attachment-0001.pgp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>pipermail/openstack-operators/<wbr>attachments/20170209/afd5a1dd/<wbr>attachment-0001.pgp</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 18:56:46 +0000<br>
From: "Hayes, Graham" <<a href="mailto:graham.hayes@hpe.com">graham.hayes@hpe.com</a>><br>
To: Jeremy Stanley <<a href="mailto:fungi@yuggoth.org">fungi@yuggoth.org</a>>,<br>
"<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>>,<br>
"<a href="mailto:user-committee@lists.openstack.org">user-committee@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:user-committee@lists.openstack.org">user-committee@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [LCOO] Intro to Large Contributing<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:CS1PR84MB02152CAC63E88595DF557AF090450@CS1PR84MB0215.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM">CS1PR84MB02152CAC63E88595DF55<wbr>7AF090450@CS1PR84MB0215.<wbr>NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM</a>><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
On 09/02/2017 16:37, Jeremy Stanley wrote:<br>
> On 2017-02-09 00:59:52 +0000 (+0000), UKASICK, ANDREW wrote:<br>
> [...]<br>
>> I'm the mysterious "AndyU" who was chatting with you about a year<br>
>> ago in IRC with questions about how to go about donating hosted<br>
>> cloud resources for use by the Infra team. It's nice to bump into<br>
>> you again! ;-) That idea is still stirring btw, but has been much<br>
>> slower moving than I'd hoped.<br>
> [...]<br>
><br>
> Always appreciated, and happy to pick that back up if and when<br>
> you're ready.<br>
><br>
>> I've been having a pretty lengthy conversation with jay Pipes<br>
>> regarding similar questions. You can catch up on that in the<br>
>> thread below this one.<br>
><br>
> I've been following it closely, and tried not to duplicate<br>
> questions/comments as much as possible.<br>
><br>
>> LCOO is unlike any other working groups that I'm familiar with in<br>
>> some significant ways. You zero'd in on one of those in your<br>
>> statements above about companies joining as opposed to<br>
>> individuals. In that regard, LCOO is similar to an entity like<br>
>> OSIC.org as opposed to a traditional working group.<br>
> [...]<br>
><br>
> This is probably where some of the confusion comes in for me; I<br>
> expect it's just one of terminology/semantics. The OpenStack User<br>
> Committee has specifically tied "Active members and contributors to<br>
> functional teams and/or working groups" to its electorate in their<br>
> charter, and also defines working groups as "teams" (which to me<br>
> implies they're made up of individuals, not organizations):<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/charter.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://governance.openstack.<wbr>org/uc/reference/charter.html</a><br>
><br>
> Maybe LCOO is something other than a "working group" in the formal<br>
> UC sense? Or maybe the organizations who participate in the LCOO<br>
> designate representatives (those LCOO "organization coordinators"<br>
> and "governance board" mentioned in your wiki article) who are the<br>
> actual working group as far as the UC is concerned? I'm just<br>
> concerned if, for example, all employees within AT&T suddenly become<br>
> part of the UC electorate by way of AT&T as an organization being an<br>
> active "member" of an official UC working group. The only way I can<br>
> really see this working is if the UC insists that its working groups<br>
> are made up of individuals and not whole organizations.<br>
><br>
>> Jira provides Kanban boards that can serve as a kind of dashboard<br>
>> allowing us to visualize activity and current status of Community<br>
>> activity. But that activity is still happening in Launchpad,<br>
>> Gerrit, etc.<br>
> [...]<br>
><br>
> Cool, so it sounds like StoryBoard may work out for you in the<br>
> long-run. It already has kanban and worklist support with optional<br>
> automation tied directly to defect/feature tracking and code review.<br>
> As the current effort to move our community from <a href="http://launchpad.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">launchpad.net</a> to<br>
> <a href="http://storyboard.openstack.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">storyboard.openstack.org</a> progresses over the next couple of<br>
> development cycles, I encourage you to check it out and start<br>
> thinking about whether its features address your needs (or consider<br>
> pitching in on further development there).<br>
><br>
>> Automating the status updating is something I've begun to discuss<br>
>> within the PWG's "Story Tracker" team. We have the same challenge<br>
>> there.<br>
> [...]<br>
><br>
> Our hope is that once we get further along with the current<br>
> migration blockers for StoryBoard, we'll implement an "epics"<br>
> concept in it which ties individual stories and their tasksets to<br>
> over-arching efforts where their progress can be tracked more<br>
> holistically.<br>
><br>
>> BTW, Atlassian has always made their tools free for use by open<br>
>> source projects. Also, although they're commercial products they<br>
>> do provide the source code and allow users to modify it freely<br>
>> which makes them much more open-source-ish than most.<br>
> [...]<br>
><br>
> <soapbox><br>
> Yes, I saw you mention it in the other ML thread. "Free as in beer"<br>
> is a somewhat dirty concept in free software development circles,<br>
> and our community infrastructure similarly eschews gratis services<br>
> like GitHub in favor of libre alternatives (we provide read-only<br>
> mirrors there on request, but don't rely on it in any of our<br>
> automation and officially recommend <a href="http://git.openstack.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">git.openstack.org</a> which runs<br>
> entirely on free software).<br>
><br>
> As an author of free software myself I prefer when people use and<br>
> help improve OpenStack rather than supporting commercial/proprietary<br>
> solutions to accomplish the same tasks, and so think it hypocritical<br>
> to not extend the same courtesy to other free software communities<br>
> who are attempting to overcome similar hurdles in their respective<br>
> problem spaces. To quote Harry Tuttle, "We're all in it together."<br>
> </soapbox><br>
><br>
> I understand you'll probably end up using whatever tools you're<br>
> familiar/comfortable with and which help you accomplish your goals,<br>
> I just ask that you keep in mind that publicly recommending non-free<br>
> tools in the service of free software development sets an example.<br>
> OpenStack already has a slightly negative reputation as "not really<br>
> free" in the wider community... one which we're desperately trying<br>
> to overcome, bit by bit.<br>
><br>
<br>
I would also have a request - if these tools are going to be used<br>
can we make them world readable, with no requirement to log in to<br>
view content?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 5<br>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 14:21:52 -0700<br>
From: David Medberry <<a href="mailto:openstack@medberry.net">openstack@medberry.net</a>><br>
To: Matt Riedemann <<a href="mailto:mriedemos@gmail.com">mriedemos@gmail.com</a>><br>
Cc: "<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [nova] FYI:<br>
live_migration_progress_<wbr>timeout will default to 0 and be deprecated in<br>
Ocata<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAJhvMSvh_qgPC4P9DeJX7Ku-<wbr>nBWmPwXv0_FVHkw=<a href="mailto:Btc7wfjESQ@mail.gmail.com">Btc7wfjESQ@<wbr>mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Matt Riedemann <<a href="mailto:mriedemos@gmail.com">mriedemos@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
><br>
Thanks for the heads up Matt, ops appreciate.<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20170209/626608ad/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>pipermail/openstack-operators/<wbr>attachments/20170209/626608ad/<wbr>attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 6<br>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:29:22 -0600<br>
From: Matt Riedemann <<a href="mailto:mriedemos@gmail.com">mriedemos@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"<br>
<<a href="mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org">openstack-dev@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>>,<br>
"<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>><br>
Subject: [Openstack-operators] [nova] Next minimum libvirt version<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:c7ec3359-3de2-cb05-2c60-a6a7a40a8ec3@gmail.com">c7ec3359-3de2-cb05-2c60-<wbr>a6a7a40a8ec3@gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
Since danpb hasn't been around I've sort of forgotten about this, but we<br>
should talk about bumping the minimum required libvirt version in nova.<br>
<br>
Currently it's 1.2.1 and the next was set to 1.2.9.<br>
<br>
On master we're gating on ubuntu 14.04 which has libvirt 1.3.1 (14.04<br>
had 1.2.2).<br>
<br>
If we move to require 1.2.9 that effectively kills 14.04 support for<br>
devstack + libvirt on master, which is probably OK.<br>
<br>
There is also the distro support wiki [1] which hasn't been updated in<br>
awhile.<br>
<br>
I'm wondering if 1.2.9 is a safe move for the next required minimum<br>
version and if so, does anyone have ideas on the next required version<br>
after that?<br>
<br>
I'm hoping some of the Red Hat people can chime in here.<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LibvirtDistroSupportMatrix" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstack.org/<wbr>wiki/<wbr>LibvirtDistroSupportMatrix</a><br>
<br>
--<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Matt Riedemann<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 7<br>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 18:51:42 -0500 (EST)<br>
From: Steve Gordon <<a href="mailto:sgordon@redhat.com">sgordon@redhat.com</a>><br>
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"<br>
<<a href="mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org">openstack-dev@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>><br>
Cc: Vladik Romanovsky <<a href="mailto:vromanov@redhat.com">vromanov@redhat.com</a>>, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui<br>
<<a href="mailto:sahid.ferdjaoui@redhat.com">sahid.ferdjaoui@redhat.com</a>>, <a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [nova] Next minimum<br>
libvirt version<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:786189857.103656865.1486684302672.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com">786189857.103656865.<wbr>1486684302672.JavaMail.zimbra@<wbr>redhat.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
> From: "Matt Riedemann" <<a href="mailto:mriedemos@gmail.com">mriedemos@gmail.com</a>><br>
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <<a href="mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org">openstack-dev@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>>,<br>
> <a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
> Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 6:29:22 PM<br>
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [nova] Next minimum libvirt version<br>
><br>
> Since danpb hasn't been around I've sort of forgotten about this, but we<br>
> should talk about bumping the minimum required libvirt version in nova.<br>
><br>
> Currently it's 1.2.1 and the next was set to 1.2.9.<br>
><br>
> On master we're gating on ubuntu 14.04 which has libvirt 1.3.1 (14.04<br>
> had 1.2.2).<br>
><br>
> If we move to require 1.2.9 that effectively kills 14.04 support for<br>
> devstack + libvirt on master, which is probably OK.<br>
<br>
This would also kill off RHEL/CentOS 7.1 support but that would also seem to be OK at this point.<br>
<br>
> There is also the distro support wiki [1] which hasn't been updated in<br>
> awhile.<br>
<br>
I've added the details I have for Fedora 25 and RHEL/CentOS 7.3, TL;DR:<br>
<br>
Fedora 25:<br>
Libvirt 2.2.0<br>
Qemu 2.7.1<br>
Libguestfs 1.34.3<br>
<br>
RHEL 7.3:<br>
Libvirt 2.0.0<br>
Qemu 2.6.0<br>
Libguestfs 1.32.7<br>
<br>
<br>
> I'm wondering if 1.2.9 is a safe move for the next required minimum<br>
> version and if so, does anyone have ideas on the next required version<br>
> after that?<br>
><br>
> I'm hoping some of the Red Hat people can chime in here.<br>
<br>
I just play someone intelligent on TV so adding Sahid and Vladik who might be better placed to comment in Dan's absence.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Steve<br>
<br>
--<br>
Steve Gordon,<br>
Principal Product Manager,<br>
Red Hat OpenStack Platform<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 8<br>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:47:12 +0100<br>
From: Belmiro Moreira <<a href="mailto:moreira.belmiro.email.lists@gmail.com">moreira.belmiro.email.lists@<wbr>gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Matt Riedemann <<a href="mailto:mriedemos@gmail.com">mriedemos@gmail.com</a>><br>
Cc: "<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [nova] FYI:<br>
live_migration_progress_<wbr>timeout will default to 0 and be deprecated in<br>
Ocata<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAPkQhneQEgwAEE56=<wbr>bGkyomMB9XPfoByN3HQamO33PnALLO<wbr>=<a href="mailto:gg@mail.gmail.com">gg@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
+1<br>
We use "block-migration" and we needed to disable this timeout.<br>
<br>
Belmiro<br>
CERN<br>
<br>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Matt Riedemann <<a href="mailto:mriedemos@gmail.com">mriedemos@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> This is just a heads up to anyone running with this since Liberty, there<br>
> is a patch [1] that will go into Ocata which deprecates the<br>
> live_migration_progress_<wbr>timeout config option used in the libvirt driver.<br>
> The default value will also change to 0, effectively disabling the feature.<br>
> See the patch and related bug report for more details.<br>
><br>
> If you've seen issues trying to use this feature, and can confirm this or<br>
> think it's actually wrong, please speak up soon (final Nova ocata tag is on<br>
> 2/16).<br>
><br>
> [1] <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/429798/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#<wbr>/c/429798/</a><br>
><br>
> --<br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
><br>
> Matt Riedemann<br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> OpenStack-operators mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/<wbr>openstack-operators</a><br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20170210/f10667bf/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>pipermail/openstack-operators/<wbr>attachments/20170210/f10667bf/<wbr>attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 9<br>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 11:10:53 +0100<br>
From: David Riedl <<a href="mailto:david.riedl@wingcon.com">david.riedl@wingcon.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
Subject: [Openstack-operators] neutron-server high cpu usage<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:8f480a06-19d4-e164-9f2e-61d5345a6ddb@wingcon.com">8f480a06-19d4-e164-9f2e-<wbr>61d5345a6ddb@wingcon.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
Hello Everyone,<br>
<br>
I just upgraded my Openstack Installation from Liberty to Mitaka. It is<br>
a pretty small cluster with only 3 nodes.<br>
<br>
Since the upgrade, the neutron-server on my control node produces a very<br>
high cpu load. Unfortunately the log files throw no errors and google<br>
does not give me any answers either, so I am a bit lost.<br>
<br>
This is my neutron.conf<br>
<a href="http://pastebin.com/cQbgeP4H" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://pastebin.com/cQbgeP4H</a><br>
Please tell me if you need any log files or config files.<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards and thanks for any help<br>
<br>
David<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 10<br>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 03:21:23 -0700<br>
From: Kevin Benton <kevin@benton.pub><br>
To: David Riedl <<a href="mailto:david.riedl@wingcon.com">david.riedl@wingcon.com</a>><br>
Cc: OpenStack Operators <<a href="mailto:openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org">openstack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] neutron-server high cpu usage<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:CAO_F6JNF-vARTpewXWQ3Tw5Mz0MrQGa_BW5Bokkj98T9b_nc6w@mail.gmail.com">CAO_F6JNF-<wbr>vARTpewXWQ3Tw5Mz0MrQGa_<wbr>BW5Bokkj98T9b_nc6w@mail.gmail.<wbr>com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Does it calm down if you stop the agents? If so, check the agent logs for<br>
exceptions because one may be stuck in a sync loop because it's<br>
encountering an error.<br>
<br>
If you still don't see anything, try reducing the report interval for the<br>
agents (and increase agent_down_time on the server accordingly) and see if<br>
that helps.<br>
<br>
<br>
On Feb 10, 2017 03:15, "David Riedl" <<a href="mailto:david.riedl@wingcon.com">david.riedl@wingcon.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Hello Everyone,<br>
<br>
I just upgraded my Openstack Installation from Liberty to Mitaka. It is a<br>
pretty small cluster with only 3 nodes.<br>
<br>
Since the upgrade, the neutron-server on my control node produces a very<br>
high cpu load. Unfortunately the log files throw no errors and google does<br>
not give me any answers either, so I am a bit lost.<br>
<br>
This is my neutron.conf<br>
<a href="http://pastebin.com/cQbgeP4H" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://pastebin.com/cQbgeP4H</a><br>
Please tell me if you need any log files or config files.<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards and thanks for any help<br>
<br>
David<br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
OpenStack-operators mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/<wbr>openstack-operators</a><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20170210/d6a4bf12/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>pipermail/openstack-operators/<wbr>attachments/20170210/d6a4bf12/<wbr>attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
OpenStack-operators mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-operators@lists.<wbr>openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/<wbr>openstack-operators</a><br>
<br>
<br>
End of OpenStack-operators Digest, Vol 76, Issue 11<br>
******************************<wbr>*********************<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Kind Regards<br> <br>Y. Rahulan <br></div>
</div>