December 2021 - openstack-discuss

OpenInfra Summit Berlin 2022 Programming Committee Nominations Now Open
by Erin Disney 19 Jan '22

19 Jan '22

Hey everyone- Programming Committee nominations <https://openinfrafoundation.formstack.com/forms/programmingcommittee2022> for the 2022 OpenInfra Summit in Berlin (June 7-9, 2022) are now open! Programming Committees for each Track will help build the Summit schedule, and are made up of individuals working in open infrastructure. Responsibilities include: Help the Summit team put together the best possible content based on your subject matter expertise Promote the individual Tracks within your networks Review the submissions and Community voting results in your particular Track Determine if there are any major content gaps in your Track, and if so, potentially solicit additional speakers directly to submit Ensure diversity of speakers and companies represented in your Track Avoid vendor sales pitches, focusing more on real-world user stories and technical, in-the-trenches experiences Identify which submissions would make good content for OpenInfra Live, the virtual show hosted by the OpenInfra Foundation that encourages live questions from a global audience 2022 Summit Tracks: 5G, NFV & Edge AI, Machine Learning & HPC CI/CD Container Infrastructure Getting Started Hands-on Workshops NEW: Hardware Enablement Open Development Private & Hybrid Cloud Public Cloud Security Full track descriptions are available here <https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/r.86088dcd62bc50a6381c19f7f26995b6>. If you’re interested in nominating yourself or someone else to be a member of the Summit Programming Committee for a specific Track, please fill out the nomination form <https://openinfrafoundation.formstack.com/forms/programmingcommittee2022>. Nominations will close on January 19, 2022. Programming Committee selections will occur before we close the Call for Presentations (CFP) so that the Committees can host office hours to consult on submissions, and help promote the event. CFP will be opening in January, registration <https://www.eventbrite.com/e/openinfra-summit-berlin-2022-tickets-211374997…> and sponsorship <https://openinfra.dev/summit/> information are already available. Please email speakersupport(a)openinfra.dev with any questions or feedback. Cheers, Erin Disney Event Marketing Open Infrastructure Foundation

1 1

Can neutron-fwaas project be revived?
by Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 17 Jan '22

17 Jan '22

Hi： The firewall project is a necessary function when the project is delivered. The lack of firewall function after switching OVN is not acceptable to customers. We intend to maintain this project and develop the fwaas driver based on ovn. Whether the neutron-fwaas project can be reactivate? What should I do ?

4 10

[Deploy] Can three all-in-one nodes form a OpenStack cluster?
by 韩光宇 10 Jan '22

10 Jan '22

Dear all, I am deploing OpenStack Victoria. Can I make a cluster with three all-in-one nodes? Will this have any problems or points to be aware of? Sorry to bother, Thank you very much. Han Guangyu.

3 4

[nova][dev] Revisiting qemu emulation where guest arch != host arch
by Apsey, Christopher 05 Jan '22

05 Jan '22

All, A few years ago I asked a question[1] about why nova, when given a hw_architecture property from glance for an image, would not end up using the correct qemu-system-xx binary when starting the guest process on a compute node if that compute nodes architecture did not match the proposed guest architecture. As an example, if we had all x86 hosts, but wanted to run an emulated ppc guest, we should be able to do that given that at least one compute node had qemu-system-ppc already installed and libvirt was successfully reporting that as a supported architecture to nova. It seemed like a heavy lift at the time, so it was put on the back burner. I am now in a position to fund a contract developer to make this happen, so the question is: would this be a useful blueprint that would potentially be accepted? Most of the time when people want to run an emulated guest they would just nest it inside of an already running guest of the native architecture, but that severely limits observability and the task of managing any more than a handful of instances in this manner quickly becomes a tangled nightmare of networking, etc. I see real benefit in allowing this scenario to run natively so all of the tooling that exists for fleet management 'just works'. This would also be a significant differentiator for OpenStack as a whole. Thoughts? [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2018-August/015653… Chris Apsey Director | Georgia Cyber Range GEORGIA CYBER CENTER 100 Grace Hopper Lane | Augusta, Georgia | 30901 https://www.gacybercenter.org

2 2

[charms] nominate Hemanth Nakkina for charms-core
by Edward Hope-Morley 04 Jan '22

04 Jan '22

I would like propose Hemanth Nakkina for charms-core. Hemanth has really stepped up his efforts to provide invaluable contributions both in code and reviews and I beleive he is in a good position to be considered for core where he will be able to provide additional value to the project. Hemanth has demonstrated rigour for quality through his contributions and is always keen to help others with his deep knowledge of the charms and Openstack. Here is a list of all his contributions: patches: https://review.opendev.org/q/owner:hemanth.nakkina%2540canonical.com reviews: https://review.opendev.org/q/reviewedby:hemanth.nakkina%2540canonical.com I hope you will join me in voting for Hemanth. - Ed

6 5

[nova] Getting away from cdrkit / genisoimage
by Thomas Goirand 04 Jan '22

04 Jan '22

Hi, Please see: https://bugs.debian.org/982241 It looks like cdrkit / genisoimage wont be available in the next Debian 12 (and therefore probably it will also be dropped in Ubuntu). As per the bug report: "I'm told xorriso and libburnia are alternatives and are alive and doing well." Would it be possible to switch to that? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)

2 1

cpu pinning
by open infra 04 Jan '22

04 Jan '22

3 7

[all][qa][triplo] Help need to maintain OpenStack health dashboard
by Ghanshyam Mann 04 Jan '22

04 Jan '22

Hello Everyone, In the QA meeting[1], we discussed the help needed to maintain the OpenStack health dashboard which is broken currently and the QA team does not have the JS developer and bandwidth to fix it. While discussing it meeting, we found that the TripleO team might be working on a similar dashboard for their CI results. If that is the case, can we collaborate on maintaining the existing dashboard? OpenStack health dashboard: https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-health Repo: http://status.openstack.org/openstack-health/#/ [1] https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/qa/2021/qa.2021-11-16-15.00.log.html#… -gmann

5 7

[tempest] Extending tempest for mixed-architecture stacks
by James LaBarre 03 Jan '22

03 Jan '22

Recently I had been running Tempest on my setup testing a mixed-architecture deployment (x86_64 ans ppc64le compute nodes at the same time). It seems that some of the migration and affinity tests will check if there's more than one Compute node before they run. However, it would seem that's as far as they check, without checking if they are in fact compatible or even of the same architecture. (my test cluster is very small, and normally includes two ppc64le Compute nodes, and sometimes one x86_64 Compute node. Currently one ppc64le machine is down for repair). Because the two compute nodes are different architectures, I am getting failures in various migration and affinity tests, maybe more if I tested a larger subset. Now granted my particular setup is a special case, but it does bring to mind some extensions that may be needed for Tempest in the future. I could see it being possible to have x86_64 and ARM mixed together in one stack, maybe even tossing in RISC-v someday. I'm thinking we need to start adding in extra test images, flavors, etc into the Tempest configurations (as in defining multiple options so that each architecture can have test images, etc assigned to it, rather than the current primary and alt image for just one architecture) Additionally, there should be testcases taking into account the architectures involved (such as seeing that an instance on one arch cannot be migrated to the other, as an example). I know this involves a bit of refactoring, I didn't know if it had even been considered yet. -- James LaBarre Software Engineer, OpenStack MultiArch Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com> jlabarre(a)redhat.com <mailto:jlabarre@redhat.com> <https://www.redhat.com>

3 2

[tc][all] Follow up pain point discussion
by Rico Lin 03 Jan '22

03 Jan '22

Dear all The pain point collection etherpad [1] seems to get good attention from teams. We plan to host a one-hour video meeting to keep the discussion going. Please fill in the doodle to select your preferred time if you can join us: https://doodle.com/poll/kur2mfywceerqcvh?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link The discussion will be hosted in video format. Here are some items (but not limited to) I expect we will discuss and hopefully put some actions/efforts on. - General Pain point: RabbitMQ - General Pain point: OpenStackClient support - General project pain point discussion: How to encourage teams to work/reply on pain points. Meanwhile, we encourage all to check the etherpad and provide your feedback. Also if teams can help to answer questions/concerns on etherpad (like Nova team does) will be greatly appreciated. [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/pain-point-elimination *Rico Lin*

7 11