December 2018 - openstack-discuss

Backporting networking-ansible to Queens
by Dan Radez 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

We have requested to add ansible-runner and update the version of python-pexpect from 4.3 to 4.5 in the openstack-requirements repository. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/624048 This is in effort to enable the networking-ansible ML2 driver in Queens. It was developed as part of the Rocky development cycle. We understood that this is outside the structure of standard practice and would like to request an exception for this change in light of it's low risk. We have customers that are asking for this ML2 driver to be enabled in our product that is based on Queens. We would like to push these changes to upstream first. This exposes the community to this code and prevents the need to carry patches downstream. This ML2 driver is an add on feature that should carry little to no technical debt for the stable/Queens code base. Python-pexpect need to be updated and we will update Triple-o to enable it to install and configure the new driver. Otherwise the backport consists of adding the ansible-runner dependency and packaging the code for the networking-ansible ML2 driver. End users are impacted only when they choose to install the feature and enable it. Thank you for your consideration, Dan Radez

3 3

[cinder][ops][docs] policy configuration howto
by Brian Rosmaita 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

At last week's cinder meeting (5 December) we had a discussion about policy checks at the database layer. While these checks seem to make it difficult to perform some policy configurations, there are too many of them to simply remove them without impacting stability given our current test coverage (at least that's my feeling). Additionally, it's possible to handle the proposed use case (a read-only administrator) without making any code changes. So we decided to fix this issue by documenting how this could work. I've got a patch up for the documentation. I've flagged this email for cinder people to read for accuracy, operators to read to make sure the instructions are clear and detailed, and docs people to read for felicity of expression. Please leave comments on the patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/624424/ cheers, brian

3 4

[Cinder] Image Name of all Instances does not show up
by Minjun Hong 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

Hi. After I installed Cinder, 'Image Name' of the created instances does not show up on horizon. When I created instances without Cinder, 'Image Name' of all instances was filled with the name of image which is used for creating the instance on horizon, like this link (https://imgur.com/0Habda7) Actually, although this does not cause any critical incorrect operation, it can make the users who use the Openstack system confused what image is used for the instances. That's why I need to resolve this issue. How can I fill 'Image Name' column with the name of the image ? Thanks! Regards,

3 3

Re: Failed live migration and duplicate attachments
by Torin Woltjer 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

How would you recommend addressing the duplicate attachments? There doesn't seem to be any adverse effect of them being there, but I cannot detach them because they are root volumes.

2 1

[openstack-dev][tripleo] TripleO CI Summary: Sprint 23
by Rafael Folco 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

Greetings, The TripleO CI team has just completed Sprint 23 (Nov 28 thru Dec 19). The following is a summary of completed work during this sprint cycle: - Completed adding standalone scenarios(1-4) jobs and disabled equivalent multinode jobs on master to save upstream resources. We will now start adding the standalone scenario jobs to tripleo projects - Improved python3 support and fixed Tempest packaging on Fedora 28 job. This is part of python3 and RHEL8 validation in upstream CI. The Fedora 28 standalone job has flapped from passing to failed, currently failing on bug <https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1808118> [3]. - After the review of the team, we have decided to use upstream zuul containers to facilitate the tripleo job recreation [4] The team is continuing to evaluate software factory rpms as the base for this work. Instructions are posted internally atm. - Tested a new CI environment for OVB jobs on RDO cloud, aka “OVB 2.0”. Experiments include ovb deployment without the te-broker. The te-broker is now offline!!! - Tempest update can be found here [5]. The planned work for the next sprint are: - Continue to fix Fedora 28 standalone job and add Fedora 28 jobs to the promotion pipeline. - Add Standalone scenarios[1-4] jobs across TripleO repos for Stein - Follow the docs and test the new “Container Zuulv3” reproducer. - Continue to work on the OVB improvements The sprint board is tracked on Taiga [1]. The Ruck and Rover for this sprint are Ronnele Landy (rlandy) and Wes Hayutin (weshay). Please direct questions or queries to them regarding CI status or issues in #tripleo, ideally to whomever has the ‘|ruck’ suffix on their nick. The Ruck and Rover notes for this sprint are tracked on etherpad [2]. Thanks, Folco [1] https://tree.taiga.io/project/tripleo-ci-board/taskboard/unified-sprint-3 [2] https://review.rdoproject.org/etherpad/p/ruckrover-sprint24 [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1808118 [4] https://docs.openstack.org/tripleo-docs/latest/contributor/reproduce-ci.html [5] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2018-December/001116… -- Rafael Folco Senior Software Engineer

1 0

[release] Release countdown for week R-15, Dec 24-28
by Sean McGinnis 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

Development Focus ----------------- There are a few project-specific deadlines coming up for milestone 2. Development should be focused on meeting any of those deadlines and preparing for the library releases that will be proposed at the milestone. General Information ------------------- This cycle we have stopped required milestone releases, and that has introduced a side-effect that means we need to take other steps to ensure that downstream packagers testing upgrades from Rocky to Stein do not have issues with the version numbers calculated by PBR on the master branch.More details can be found in the mailing list post here: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-October/135706.html The release team has generated empty commits to cause PBR to increment its calculated version as a fix for the situation, and we have a few of those patches open still. Please merge them as soon as possible to support the people who are testing upgrades. https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:sem-ver Upcoming Deadlines & Dates -------------------------- Stein-2 Milestone: January 10 -- Sean McGinnis (smcginnis)

1 0

Devstack - yet more problems on install
by d.lake＠surrey.ac.uk 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

Following on from the last email about br-ex causing everything to baulk, I manually created the br-ex using brctl addbr br-ex and got past that hurdle. But now falling over with another one ERROR oslo_db.sqlalchemy.exc_filters InternalError: (1071, u'Specified key was too long; max key length is 767 bytes') ERROR oslo_db.sqlalchemy.exc_filters Error during database migration: (pymysql.err.InternalError) (1071, u'Specified key was too long; max key length is 767 bytes') [SQL: u'\nALTER TABLE quota_usages CHANGE COLUMN resource resource VARCHAR(300)'] (Background on this error at: http://sqlalche.me/e/2j85) Base OS is CentOS 7.5. I've found this which looks similar - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/626146/ - but I've no idea how to apply it to my Devstack installation. I'd appreciate some assistance please. David

3 3

Use cases mapping to MVP architectures - FEEDBACK NEEDED
by Ildiko Vancsa 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

Hi, Hereby I would like to forward you the mapping of use cases to MVP architectures that Gergely Csatari is working on. Please provide feedback on this work item to make sure we are considering all the aspects. Thanks and Best Regards, Gergely and Ildikó In the Edge Coputing Group we are collecting use cases for the edge cloud infrastructure. They are recorded in our wiki [1] and they describe high level scenarios when an edge cloud infrastructure would be needed. During the second Denver PTG discussions we drafted two MVP architectures what we could build from the current functionality of OpenStack with some slight modifications [2]. These are based on the work of James and his team from Oath. We differentiate between a distributed [3] and a centralized [4] control plane architecture scenarios. In one of the Berlin Forum sessions we were asked to map the MVP architecture scenarios to the use cases so I made an initial mapping and now I’m looking for feedback. This mapping only means, that the listed use case can be implemented using the MVP architecture scenarios. It should be noted, that none of the MVP architecture scenarios provide solution for edge cloud infrastructure upgrade or centralized management. Here I list the use cases and the mapped architecture scenarios: Mobile service provider 5G/4G virtual RAN deployment and Edge Cloud B2B2X [5] Both distributed [3] and centralized [4] Universal customer premise equipment (uCPE) for Enterprise Network Services[6] Both distributed [3] and centralized [4] Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Drones) [7] None - assuming that this Use Case requires a Small Edge instance which can work in case of a network partitioning event Cloud Storage Gateway - Storage at the Edge [8] None - assuming that this Use Case requires a Small Edge instance which can work in case of a network partitioning event Open Caching - stream/store data at the edge [9] Both distributed [3] and centralized [4] Smart City as Software-Defined closed-loop system [10] The use case is not complete enough to figure out Augmented Reality -- Sony Gaming Network [11] None - assuming that this Use Case requires a Small Edge instance which can work in case of a network partitioning event Analytics/control at the edge [12] The use case is not complete enough to figure out Manage retail chains - chick-fil-a [13] The use case is not complete enough to figure out At this moment chick-fil-a uses a different Kubernetes cluster in every edge location and they manage them using Git [14] Smart Home [15] None - assuming that this Use Case requires a Small Edge instance which can work in case of a network partitioning event Data Collection - Smart cooler/cold chain tracking [16] None - assuming that this Use Case requires a Small Edge instance which can work in case of a network partitioning event VPN Gateway Service Delivery [17] The use case is not complete enough to figure out [1]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases [2]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Edge_Reference_Archite… [3]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Edge_Reference_Archite… [4]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Edge_Reference_Archite… [5]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Mobile_servi…. [6]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Universal_cu… [7]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Unmanned_Air… [8]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Cloud_Storag… [9]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Open_Caching… [10]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Smart_City_a… [11]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Augmented_Re… [12]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Analytics.2F… [13]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Manage_retai… [14]: https://schd.ws/hosted_files/kccna18/34/GitOps.pdf [15]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Smart_Home [16]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#Data_Collect… [17]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Edge_Computing_Group/Use_Cases#VPN_Gateway_… _______________________________________________ Edge-computing mailing list Edge-computing(a)lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edge-computing

1 1

[tc] Technical Committee Status for 17 Dec 2081
by Doug Hellmann 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

This is the (mostly) weekly summary of work being done by the Technical Committee members. The full list of active items is managed in the wiki: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Technical_Committee_Tracker We also track TC objectives for the cycle using StoryBoard at: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/923 == Recent Activity == Project updates: * Add os-resource-classes under Nova: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/621699/ Other updates: * I added a TC "house rule" for voting on updates to the release management metadata for projects, to make it easier to keep those up to date: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/622989/ * Thierry has been working on a series of changes on behalf of the release management team to record the release management style used for each deliverable listed in the governance repository. ** https://review.openstack.org/#/c/622902/ ** https://review.openstack.org/#/c/622903/ ** https://review.openstack.org/#/c/622904/ ** https://review.openstack.org/#/c/624704/ ** https://review.openstack.org/#/c/624951/ ** https://review.openstack.org/#/c/624996/ * I updated the documentation of chair responsibilities to include the OSF annual report: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/624790/ * Lance proposed an update to document the process for changing PTLs in the middle of a cycle: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/620928/ * Ghanshyam proposed an update to clarify the term of TC chair, since some responsibilities include managing the election fo the next chair: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/621498/ * Zane's resolution describing how we will keep up with future Python 3 releases has been approved: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/613145/ * Thierry and Chris' work to document the role of the TC has been approved: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/622400/ * I documented the official topic tags used to designate the voting rules to apply to each governance patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/625004/ == TC Meetings == The next TC meeting will be 3 December @ 1400 UTC in #openstack-tc. See http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Technical_Committee_Meeting for details == Ongoing Discussions == Ghanshyam has proposed an enhancement to the Vision for OpenStack Clouds to cover feature discovery. * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/621516/ I have proposed an update to the TC house voting rules to cover documentation changes in the governance repository. * https://review.openstack.org/625005 Dougal Matthews is stepping down as Mistral PTL, to be replaced by Renat Akhmerov. * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/625537/ == TC member actions/focus/discussions for the coming week(s) == We need to work to approve Sean's patch with the Stein supported/testing runtimes list. * https://review.openstack.org/611080 Thierry started a thread on the mailing list about adapting our office hours times. It would be good for us to resolve that so we can make the change after the new year, so I have renewed the thread with a summary of the options. Please vote. * http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2018-December/001036… == Contacting the TC == The Technical Committee uses a series of weekly "office hour" time slots for synchronous communication. We hope that by having several such times scheduled, we will have more opportunities to engage with members of the community from different timezones. Office hour times in #openstack-tc: - 09:00 UTC on Tuesdays - 01:00 UTC on Wednesdays - 15:00 UTC on Thursdays If you have something you would like the TC to discuss, you can add it to our office hour conversation starter etherpad at: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tc-office-hour-conversation-starters Many of us also run IRC bouncers which stay in #openstack-tc most of the time, so please do not feel that you need to wait for an office hour time to pose a question or offer a suggestion. You can use the string "tc-members" to alert the members to your question. You will find channel logs with past conversations at http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/ If you expect your topic to require significant discussion or to need input from members of the community other than the TC, please start a mailing list discussion on openstack-discuss at lists.openstack.org and use the subject tag "[tc]" to bring it to the attention of TC members. -- Doug

3 4

[networking-ovs-dpdk] Issue creating br-ex...
by d.lake＠surrey.ac.uk 21 Dec '18

21 Dec '18

Hello Trying to re-run a Queens DPDK all-in-one using devstack which I built in August and hitting issues. The local.conf is identical between the two machines except I had to take the "stable/queens" off the end of the "networking-ovs-dpdk" plugin line as that no longer appears to work. The installation seems to proceed until it gets to setting the ip mtu on br-ex. I'm not using br-ex. I've declared OVS bridge mappings in the local.conf: #Dual socket platform with 16GB RAM,3072*2048kB hugepages leaves ~4G for the system. OVS_NUM_HUGEPAGES=3072 #Dual socket platform with 64GB RAM,14336*2048kB hugepages leaves ~6G for the system. #OVS_NUM_HUGEPAGES=14336 OVS_DATAPATH_TYPE=netdev OVS_LOG_DIR=/opt/stack/logs #OVS_DPDK_PORT_MAPPINGS=p1p1:br-dpdk1,p1p2:br-dpdk2,p2p1:br-dpdk3,p2p2:br-dpdk4 OVS_DPDK_PORT_MAPPINGS=p6p1:br-dpdk1,p6p2:br-dpdk2 #OVS_BRIDGE_MAPPINGS=physnet1:br-dpdk1,physnet2:br-dpdk2,physnet3:br-dpdk3,physnet4:br-dpdk4 OVS_BRIDGE_MAPPINGS=physnet1:br-dpdk1,physnet2:br-dpdk2 [[post-config|$NOVA_CONF]] [DEFAULT] firewall_driver=nova.virt.firewall.NoopFirewallDriver scheduler_default_filters=RamFilter,ComputeFilter,AvailabilityZoneFilter,ComputeCapabilitiesFilter,ImagePropertiesFilter,PciPassthroughFilter [[post-config|/etc/neutron/plugins/ml2/ml2_conf.ini]] [OVS] datapath_type=netdev [ml2_type_flat] #flat_networks=physnet1,physnet2,physnet3,physnet4 flat_networks=physnet1,physnet2 I cannot stress again how identical these systems are - same hardware, same base OS install (CentOS 7.5). I was (maybe erroneously!) thinking that if I had it devstack working on one system, having an identical system would be a piece of cake to install. This is the installation error: +lib/neutron_plugins/ovs_base:_neutron_ovs_base_add_bridge:21 local bridge=br-ex +lib/neutron_plugins/ovs_base:_neutron_ovs_base_add_bridge:22 local 'addbr_cmd=sudo ovs-vsctl -- --may-exist add-br br-ex' +lib/neutron_plugins/ovs_base:_neutron_ovs_base_add_bridge:24 '[' netdev '!=' system ']' +lib/neutron_plugins/ovs_base:_neutron_ovs_base_add_bridge:25 addbr_cmd='sudo ovs-vsctl -- --may-exist add-br br-ex -- set Bridge br-ex datapath_type=netdev' +lib/neutron_plugins/ovs_base:_neutron_ovs_base_add_bridge:28 sudo ovs-vsctl -- --may-exist add-br br-ex -- set Bridge br-ex datapath_type=netdev +lib/neutron_plugins/ovs_base:_neutron_ovs_base_add_public_bridge:119 set_mtu br-ex 1500 +functions:set_mtu:750 local dev=br-ex +functions:set_mtu:751 local mtu=1500 +functions:set_mtu:752 sudo ip link set mtu 1500 dev br-ex Cannot find device "br-ex" +functions:set_mtu:1 exit_trap +./stack.sh:exit_trap:522 local r=1 ++./stack.sh:exit_trap:523 jobs -p +./stack.sh:exit_trap:523 jobs= +./stack.sh:exit_trap:526 [[ -n '' ]] +./stack.sh:exit_trap:532 '[' -f /tmp/tmp.Dzbqzlk2fs ']' +./stack.sh:exit_trap:533 rm /tmp/tmp.Dzbqzlk2fs +./stack.sh:exit_trap:537 kill_spinner +./stack.sh:kill_spinner:432 '[' '!' -z '' ']' +./stack.sh:exit_trap:539 [[ 1 -ne 0 ]] +./stack.sh:exit_trap:540 echo 'Error on exit' Error on exit +./stack.sh:exit_trap:542 type -p generate-subunit +./stack.sh:exit_trap:543 generate-subunit 1545230781 1747 fail +./stack.sh:exit_trap:545 [[ -z /opt/stack/logs/screen ]] +./stack.sh:exit_trap:548 /home/stack/devstack/tools/worlddump.py -d /opt/stack/logs/screen Can someone explain what is going on here please? Thanks David

3 4