July 2019 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[keystone][oslo] oslo.limt implementation update
by Lance Bragstad 02 Jul '19

02 Jul '19

Today in keystone's office hours, we went through a group code review of what's currently proposed for the oslo.limit library [0]. This is a summary of the action items that came out of that meeting. * We should implement a basic functional testing framework that exercises keystoneauth connections (used for pulling limit information for keystone). Otherwise, we'll be mocking things left and right in unit tests to get decent test coverage with the current keystoneauth code. * Investigate alternatives to globals for keystoneauth connections [1]. * Investigate adopting a keystoneauth-like way of loading enforcement models (similar to how ksa loads authentication plugins) [2]. * Figure out if we want to use endpoint_id or service name + region name for service configuration [3]. * Build out functional testing for flat enforcement * Implement strict-two-level enforcement model This existing rewrite was mostly stolen from John's patches to his fork oslo.limit [4]. Hopefully the current series moves things in that direction. Feel free to chime in if you have additional notes or comments. Lance [0] https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:rewrite+(status:open+OR+status:merged)… [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo.limit/+bug/1835103 [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo.limit/+bug/1835104 [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo.limit/+bug/1835106 [4] https://github.com/JohnGarbutt/oslo.limit/commit/a5b908046fd904c25b6cd15c65…

2 2

[ops] Ops Meetups Team meeting 2019-7-2
by Chris Morgan 02 Jul '19

02 Jul '19

Meeting minutes for todays meeting are linked below. Two key decisions from today that you might like to know about: 1. The team will attempt to run an ops day at the Shanghai summit if there is a) sufficient interest and b) space to hold it. To gauge the interest level we will run a twitter poll. We have found that the engagement we get via twitter is actually better than via mailing lists. 2. The current consensus for the next meetups is as follows: September, NYC (USA) - this is under preparation 2020 meetup #1 EU region 2020 meetup #2 APAC region Calls for hosting the 2020 meetups will be issued by the meetups team soon. Thanks Chris Morgan (on behalf of the openstack ops meetups team) Meeting ended Tue Jul 2 14:48:24 2019 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) 10:48 AM Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/ops_meetup_team/2019/ops_meetup_tea… 10:48 AM Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/ops_meetup_team/2019/ops_meetup_tea… 10:48 AM Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/ops_meetup_team/2019/ops_meetup_tea… -- Chris Morgan <mihalis68(a)gmail.com>

1 0

[tc][ops] reviving osops- repos
by Mohammed Naser 02 Jul '19

02 Jul '19

Hi everyone, So we've realized that we have a few operational tools that we keep around that live all over the place and it would probably be the best for the community to have access to them. I did a bit of research and it looks like the openstack/osops-* repos used to exist between operators to maintain things like this, however, they've gone pretty abandoned over time. I'd like to pick up this effort and as part of doing that, I'd like to move them into a GitHub organization and rename them out of x/ to make them not seem so .. 'dead'. I've requested to move x/osops-* to openstack-operators/* in GitHub so that I can setup the appropriate mirroring in post pipeline (and then propose a patch to rename things inside Gerrit as well). There was concern around the idea of using 'openstack' as it's a copyrighted term and a TC discussion was brought up as an idea which makes sense. I'd like to ask if everyone else feels like it's okay so move things into that org and host them there. Thanks, Mohammed -- Mohammed Naser — vexxhost ----------------------------------------------------- D. 514-316-8872 D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200 E. mnaser(a)vexxhost.com W. http://vexxhost.com

9 15

[neutron][ci] Gate failure
by Slawek Kaplonski 02 Jul '19

02 Jul '19

Hi, It looks that we (again) have some broken gate. This time it’s problem with neutron-tempest-plugin-designate-scenario job which is failing 100% times. See [1] for details. Patch [2] is proposed so now lets wait until it will be merged and You can than rebase Your neutron patches to make Zuul happy again :) [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1834849 [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/668447/ — Slawek Kaplonski Senior software engineer Red Hat

3 5

Does networking-ovn support fwaas ?
by Frank Wang 02 Jul '19

02 Jul '19

Hi all, I'm investigating ovn as the neutron backend recently, networking-ovn is a great project, but one thing confuses me, I'd like to know if networking-ovn support fwaas? Security protection for network level, not port leve like security group, I looked up lots of materials, didn't find a clue. Any comments would be appreciated.

1 0

[kolla][ceph] Cache OSDs didn't stay in the root=cache after ceph deployment.
by Eddie Yen 02 Jul '19

02 Jul '19

Hi, I'm using stable/rocky to try ceph cache tiering. Now I'm facing a one issue. I chose one SSD to become cache tier disk. And set below options in globals.yml. ceph_enable_cache = "yes" ceph_target_max_byte= "<size num>" ceph_target_max_objects = "<object num>" ceph_cache_mode = "writeback" And the default OSD type is bluestore. It will bootstrap the cache disk and create another OSD container. And also create the root bucket called "cache". then set the cache rule to every cache pools. The problem is, that OSD didn't stay at "cache" bucket, it still stay at "default" bucket. That caused the services can't access to the Ceph normally. Especially deploying Gnocchi. When error occurred, I manually set that OSD to the cache bucket then re-deploy, and everything is normal now. But still a strange issue that it stay in the wrong bucket. Did I miss something during deployment? Or what can I do? Many thanks, Eddie.

2 2

[octavia] HTTP/2 support
by Volodymyr Litovka 01 Jul '19

01 Jul '19

Dear colleagues, - since haproxy supports HTTP/2 starting 1.9 (released on Dec 2018) for both frontends and backends - due to wide adoption of HTTP/2 (34% of all sites are now support HTTP/2 according to W3techs) - support for HTTP/2 is in all browsers and web-servers whether Octavia team has plans to add support for HTTP/2 as well? Thank you. -- Volodymyr Litovka "Vision without Execution is Hallucination." -- Thomas Edison

2 1

[tripleo] TripleO CI Summary: Sprint 32
by Rafael Folco 01 Jul '19

01 Jul '19

Greetings, The TripleO CI team has just completed Sprint 32 / Unified Sprint 11 (June 06 thru Jun 26). The following is a summary of completed work during this sprint cycle: - Created image and container build jobs on RHEL 7 in the internal instance of Software Factory as a prep work for RHEL8 jobs on RDO Software Factory. - Started creating RHEL8 jobs to build a periodic pipeline in the RDO Software Factory and provide feedback for CentOS8 coverage. - Promotion status: green on all branches at most of the sprint. The planned work for the next sprint [1] are: - Prepare the grounds for moving RDO on RHEL8 jobs from the internal instance of Software Factory to the RDO instance. This includes building a nodepool image w/ RHUI for base repos and enabling RHEL8 on tripleo-repos for delorean repos. - Get RDO on RHEL8 build jobs working and address dependency issues. - Continue the design document for a staging environment to test changes in the promoter server. This will benefit CI team with less breakages in the promoter server and also prepare the grounds for the multi-arch builds. The Ruck and Rover for this sprint are Arx Cruz (arxcruz) and Sagi Shnaidman (sshnaidm). Please direct questions or queries to them regarding CI status or issues in #tripleo, ideally to whomever has the ‘|ruck’ suffix on their nick. Ruck/rover notes are being tracked in etherpad [2]. Thanks, rfolco [1] https://tree.taiga.io/project/tripleo-ci-board/taskboard/unified-sprint-12 [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ruckroversprint12

1 0

[manila] no meeting July 4
by Tom Barron 01 Jul '19

01 Jul '19

We just agreed in freenode #openstack-manila to skip this week's Manila community meeting since several regular attendees including the chair are on holiday. We'll plan to meet as usual the following Thursday, 11 July, at 1500 UTC in #openstack-meeting-alt. Feel free to add to the agenda here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Manila/Meetings -- Tom Barron

1 0

Re: [Release-job-failures] Release of openstack/ansible-role-redhat-subscription failed
by Thierry Carrez 01 Jul '19

01 Jul '19

zuul(a)openstack.org wrote: > Build failed. > > - release-openstack-python http://logs.openstack.org/59/59f40f154a5302df1ee4230f35f87d261e0bf9eb/relea… : POST_FAILURE in 2m 09s > - announce-release announce-release : SKIPPED > - propose-update-constraints propose-update-constraints : SKIPPED Upload to PyPI at the end of the release was rejected due to: "The description failed to render in the default format of reStructuredText. See https://pypi.org/help/#description-content-type for more information." Impact: ansible-role-redhat-subscription 1.0.3 was produced and published, but not uploaded to PyPI. Remediation: once the description is fixed, we'll have to request a 1.0.4 to fix the situation. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)

3 3