January 2019 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[dev][keystone] Keystone Team Update - Week of 7 January 2019
by Colleen Murphy 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

# Keystone Team Update - Week of 7 January 2019 Happy new year! We are ramping back up following the holidays. ## News ### Cross-Project Limits Followup We are trying to close in on a stable API for limits and want to restart the discussion on what the other projects need from it. Please chime in on the thread or the linked reviews[1]. [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-January/001518.… ## Open Specs Stein specs: https://bit.ly/2Pi6dGj Ongoing specs: https://bit.ly/2OyDLTh Spec freeze is today but we have two open specs for still open for Stein, we will need to decide whether to push them or grant exceptions for them, keeping in mind there is not much time left for implementation at this point. ## Recently Merged Changes Search query: https://bit.ly/2pquOwT We merged 27 changes this week. ## Changes that need Attention Search query: https://bit.ly/2RLApdA There are 103 changes that are passing CI, not in merge conflict, have no negative reviews and aren't proposed by bots. Lance's patch bomb of doom still needs more review attention. ## Bugs Since the last report we opened 7 new bugs and closed 10. Bugs opened (7) Bug #1810485 (keystone:Medium) opened by Guang Yee https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1810485 Bug #1810983 (keystone:Medium) opened by Guang Yee https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1810983 Bug #1809779 (keystone:Undecided) opened by Yang Youseok https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1809779 Bug #1810393 (keystone:Undecided) opened by wangxiyuan https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1810393 Bug #1810278 (keystonemiddleware:Undecided) opened by Yang Youseok https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystonemiddleware/+bug/1810278 Bug #1810761 (keystonemiddleware:Undecided) opened by Hugo Kou https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystonemiddleware/+bug/1810761 Bug #1811351 (python-keystoneclient:Undecided) opened by Colleen Murphy https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-keystoneclient/+bug/1811351 Bugs closed (2) Bug #1809779 (keystone:Undecided) https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1809779 Bug #1810761 (keystonemiddleware:Undecided) https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystonemiddleware/+bug/1810761 Bugs fixed (8) Bug #1805403 (keystone:Medium) fixed by Lance Bragstad https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1805403 Bug #1810485 (keystone:Medium) fixed by Guang Yee https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1810485 Bug #1810983 (keystone:Medium) fixed by no one https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1810983 Bug #1786594 (keystone:Low) fixed by Colleen Murphy https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1786594 Bug #1793374 (keystone:Low) fixed by Colleen Murphy https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1793374 Bug #1810393 (keystone:Undecided) fixed by wangxiyuan https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1810393 Bug #1809101 (keystonemiddleware:Undecided) fixed by leehom https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystonemiddleware/+bug/1809101 Bug #1807184 (oslo.policy:Medium) fixed by Brian Rosmaita https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo.policy/+bug/1807184 ## Milestone Outlook https://releases.openstack.org/stein/schedule.html Spec freeze is today. The feature proposal freeze is at the end of this month, with feature freeze just five weeks after. ## Help with this newsletter Help contribute to this newsletter by editing the etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-team-newsletter Dashboard generated using gerrit-dash-creator and https://gist.github.com/lbragstad/9b0477289177743d1ebfc276d1697b67

1 0

openstack stack fails
by Alfredo De Luca 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

Hi all. I installed magnum on openstack and now, after a few issue with cinder type list error, it passed that issue but now I have another one.... AuthorizationFailure: resources.kube_masters.resources[0].resources.master_wait_handle: Authorization failed. Not sure what to do nor check Any clue? Cheers -- *Alfredo*

3 37

Issues setting up a SolidFire node with Cinder
by Grant Morley 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

Hi all, We are in the process of trying to add a SolidFire storage solution to our existing OpenStack setup and seem to have hit a snag with cinder / iscsi. We are trying to create a bootable volume to allow us to launch an instance from it, but we are getting some errors in our cinder-volumes containers that seem to suggest they can't connect to iscsi although the volume seems to create fine on the SolidFire node. The command we are running is: openstack volume create --image $image-id --size 20 --bootable --type solidfire sf-volume-v12 The volume seems to create on SolidFire but I then see these errors in the "cinder-volume.log" https://pastebin.com/LyjLUhfk The volume containers can talk to the iscsi VIP on the SolidFire so I am a bit stuck and wondered if anyone had come across any issues before? Kind Regards, -- Grant Morley Cloud Lead Absolute DevOps Ltd Units H, J & K, Gateway 1000, Whittle Way, Stevenage, Herts, SG1 2FP www.absolutedevops.io <http://www.absolutedevops.io/> grant(a)absolutedevops.io <mailto:grant@absolutedevops.io> 0845 874 0580

3 2

[TripleO] flattening breakages
by Dan Prince 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

I noticed a few breakages [1][2] today with the flattening effort in the codebase. Specifically we are missing some of the 'monitoring_subscription' sections in the flattened files. We apparently have no CI on these ATM so please be careful in reviewing patches in this regard until (and if) we can add CI on this feature. I fear this type of restructuring is going to break subtle things and highlight what we don't have CI on. Some of the 3rd party vendor integration worries me in that we've got no upstream way of testing this stuff ATM. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/630280/ (Ironic) [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/630281/ (Aodh)

1 0

[infra] Updating fedora-latest nodeset to Fedora 29
by Ian Wienand 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

Hi, Just a heads up that we're soon switching "fedora-latest" nodes from Fedora 28 to Fedora 29 [1] (setting up this switch took a bit longer than usual, see [2]). Presumably if you're using "fedora-latest" you want the latest Fedora, so this should not be unexpected :) But this is the first time we're making this transition with the "-latest" nodeset, so please report any issues. Thanks, -i [1] https://review.openstack.org/618673 [2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-January/001530.…

2 1

[cinder] volume encryption performance impact
by Dave Holland 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

Hello, I've just started investigating Cinder volume encryption using Queens (RHOSP13) with a Ceph/RBD backend and the performance overhead is... surprising. Some naive bonnie++ numbers, comparing a plain vs encrypted volume: plain: write 1400MB/s, read 390MB/s encrypted: write 81MB/s, read 83MB/s The encryption was configured with: openstack volume type create --encryption-provider nova.volume.encryptors.luks.LuksEncryptor --encryption-cipher aes-xts-plain64 --encryption-key-size 256 --encryption-control-location front-end LuksEncryptor-Template-256 Does anyone have a similar setup, and can share their performance figures, or give me an idea of what percentage performance impact I should expect? Alternatively: is AES256 overkill, or, where should I start looking for a misconfiguration or bottleneck? Thanks in advance. Dave -- ** Dave Holland ** Systems Support -- Informatics Systems Group ** ** 01223 496923 ** Wellcome Sanger Institute, Hinxton, UK ** -- The Wellcome Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.

4 4

[dev][Tacker] Implementing Multisite VNFFG
by 이호찬 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

Dear Tacker folks, Hello, I'm interested in implementing multisite VNFFG in Tacker project. As far as I know, current single Tacker controller can manage multiple Openstack sites (Multisite VIM), but it can create VNFFG in only singlesite, so it can't create VNFFG across multisite. I think if multisite VNFFG is possible, tacker can have more flexibility in managing VNF and VNFFG. In the current tacker, networking-sfc driver is used to support VNFFG, and networking-sfc uses port chaining to construct service chain. So, I think extending current port chaining in singleiste to multisite can be one solution. Is there development process about multisite VNFFG in tacker project? Otherwise, I wonder that tacker is interested in this feature. I want to develop this feature for Tacker project if I can. Yours sincerely, Hochan Lee.

3 2

[congress][infra] override-checkout problem
by Eric K 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

The congress-tempest-plugin zuul jobs against stable branches appear to be working incorrectly. Tests that should fail on stable/rocky (and indeed fails when triggered by congress patch [1]) are passing when triggered by congress-tempest-plugin patch [2]. I'd assume it's some kind of zuul misconfiguration in congress-tempest-plugin [3], but I've so far failed to figure out what's wrong. Particularly strange is that the job-output appears to show it checking out the right thing [4]. Any thoughts or suggestions? Thanks so much! [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/629070/ http://logs.openstack.org/70/629070/4/check/congress-devstack-api-mysql/874… The two failing z3 tests should indeed fail because the feature was not available in rocky. The tests were introduced because for some reason they pass in the job triggered by a patch in congress-tempest-plugin. [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/618951/ http://logs.openstack.org/51/618951/3/check/congress-devstack-api-mysql-roc… [3] https://github.com/openstack/congress-tempest-plugin/blob/master/.zuul.yaml… [4] http://logs.openstack.org/51/618951/3/check/congress-devstack-api-mysql-roc… shows congress is checked out to the correct commit at the top of the stable/rocky branch.

2 1

[senlin] Meeting today at 0530 UTC
by Duc Truong 11 Jan '19

11 Jan '19

Everyone, Our regular Senlin meetings are resuming today. This is an even week so the meeting will be happening on Friday at 530 UTC. Regards, Duc

1 0

[tripleo] OVB 2.0-dev branch merged to master
by Ben Nemec 10 Jan '19

10 Jan '19

In preparation for importing OVB to Gerrit, the 2.0-dev branch was merged back to master. If the 2.0 changes break you, please use the stable/1.0 branch instead, which was created from the last commit before 2.0-dev was merged. -Ben

1 0