July 2021 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[wallaby][neutron][ovn] Multiple VLAN ranges and FLAT network
by Malik Obaid 06 Aug '21

06 Aug '21

Hi, I am using Openstack Wallaby release on Ubuntu 20.04. I am configuring openstack neutron for production and just want to know is there a way to specify different vlan ranges with multiple physical networks. I would really appreciate any input in this regard. Thank you. Regards, Malik Obaid

2 1

gerrit no longer lading from iphone
by Sorin Sbarnea 05 Aug '21

05 Aug '21

I am wondering if something was changed on our gerrit deployment recently as it seems to no longer load on ios safari. I know,… not the most common use case… still adding the usual recheck can prove useful after checking zuul comment. /zbr -- -- /zbr

5 7

Migrating VM's
by Derek O keeffe 04 Aug '21

04 Aug '21

Hi all, I have a question. If we have an old openstack deployment (Queens) that have VM's (with & without volumes attached) and we want to migrate those to a new deploy (Victoria) can this be achieved by the owners of the VM's through horizon in some way? We can take snapshots of the vm's that don't have volumes attached, copy them to the new controller and re instantiate them but we haven't found a solution for the volumes yet. This give us more work though as it all needs to be done over cli so the user is taken out of the loop and it falls on us 3 admins to move over 300 VM's. Any advice or info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Derek

3 7

[nova][neutron][deployment-projects] Re secbug #1734320
by Radosław Piliszek 03 Aug '21

03 Aug '21

Hello Folks! I am writing this because a recent patch proposed to DevStack [1] mentioned "when using ml2/ovs vif isolation should always be used to prevent cross tenant traffic during a live migration" which is related to secbug #1734320 "Eavesdropping private traffic" [2]. However, I've found that none of the publicly-available deployment projects seem to be using ``isolate_vif``. [3] [4] Should this be corrected? PS: I used the deployment-projects tag as a collective tag to avoid mentioning all the projects (as it is too long to write :-) ). I hope that relevant people see this if need be or someone passes the information to them. For now, I am curious whether this should actually be enforced by default with ML2/OVS. [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/796826 [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1734320 [3] https://codesearch.opendev.org/?q=%5Cbisolate_vif%5Cb&i=nope&files=&exclude… [4] https://github.com/search?p=1&q=isolate_vif&type=Code -yoctozepto

3 2

stackalytics.com/api/1.0/activity
by Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - FI/Espoo) 03 Aug '21

03 Aug '21

Hi, We plan to use the API of stackalytics.com and we realized that the data it provides ([1<https://www.stackalytics.com/api/1.0/activity?page_size=100>]) is never more recent than March 2021. Does anyone know what is the reason for this? Thanks, Gergely 1: https://www.stackalytics.com/api/1.0/activity?page_size=100

5 5

[swift] EC data left in old location after rebalance
by Reid Guyett 02 Aug '21

02 Aug '21

Hello, We started using EC policies in a new cluster a few months ago and added more capacity. During the rebalance (started June 30), it seems that all the data was copied to the new locations but it didn't clean up the old locations. This was identified through our handoff monitoring. OS: Ubuntu 18.04 Swift: 2.17.1 Example: List of devices for partition ~$ swift-get-nodes /etc/swift/object-4.ring.gz -p 14242 ... removed ... Server:Port Device x.x.x.31:6031 d31 Server:Port Device x.x.x.66:6030 d30 Server:Port Device x.x.x.25:6029 d29 Server:Port Device x.x.x.33:6027 d27 Server:Port Device x.x.x.36:6020 d20 Server:Port Device x.x.x.29:6018 d18 Server:Port Device x.x.x.21:6033 d33 Server:Port Device x.x.x.27:6025 d25 Server:Port Device x.x.x.35:6022 d22 Server:Port Device x.x.x.39:6031 d31 Server:Port Device x.x.x.28:6032 d32 Server:Port Device x.x.x.23:6021 d21 Server:Port Device x.x.x.26:6022 d22 Server:Port Device x.x.x.34:6023 d23 Server:Port Device x.x.x.37:6019 d19 Server:Port Device x.x.x.30:6017 d17 Server:Port Device x.x.x.22:6027 d27 Server:Port Device x.x.x.24:6031 d31 Server:Port Device x.x.x.32:6032 d32 Partitions look to have the correct data on them: ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.31 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d31/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.66 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d30/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.25 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d29/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.33 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d27/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.36 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d20/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.29 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d18/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.21 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d33/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.27 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d25/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.35 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d22/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.39 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d31/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.28 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d32/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.23 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d21/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.26 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d22/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.34 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d23/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.37 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d19/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.30 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d17/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.22 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d27/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.24 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d31/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 ~$ ssh root(a)x.x.x.32 "ls -lah ${DEVICE:-/srv/node*}/d32/objects-4/14242 | wc -l" 664 >From one of the nodes that does not belong to the list above. This partition should not exist on this node after the rebalance. x.x.x.20:~# ls /srv/node/d28/objects-4/14242 | wc -l 627 The reconstructor is throwing a lot of these unexpected response errors in the logs. Manually running it from the node that should not have the partition, I can reproduce the error. x.x.y.0/24 is the replication network. x.x.x.20:~# swift-object-reconstructor /etc/swift/object-server.conf -d d28 -p 14242 -o -v object-reconstructor: x.x.y.42:6200/d30/14242 Unexpected response: ":ERROR: 500 'ERROR: With :UPDATES: 36 failures to 0 successes'" There looked to have been some partition locations cleaned up around July 11. Our expectation is that the old partition locations should be cleaned gradually since June 30 but we're not seeing that. I Was hoping for some ideas on what may be the problem (if any) and how we can make sure that the old partitions are cleaned up. Thanks, Reid

2 4

[ironic] Xena Mid-cycle
by Iury Gregory 02 Aug '21

02 Aug '21

Hello Ironicers! In our upstream meeting we decided we should do a virtual mid-cycle! If you are interested please fill out the doodle[1] and add topics in the etherpad[2]. Keep in mind we have contributors in many time zones, if you think we should add more time windows, please let me know. Maybe we can have multiple sessions each day so we can accommodate APAC TZ. I will close the doodle before our upstream meeting next week. [1] https://doodle.com/poll/mhh959u4s4rturxi [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/ironic-xena-midcycle -- *Att[]'sIury Gregory Melo Ferreira * *MSc in Computer Science at UFCG* *Part of the ironic-core and puppet-manager-core team in OpenStack* *Software Engineer at Red Hat Czech* *Social*: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iurygregory *E-mail: iurygregory(a)gmail.com <iurygregory(a)gmail.com>*

1 1

[nova][gate] nova-tox-functional-* jobs failing on master branch
by melanie witt 02 Aug '21

02 Aug '21

Hey all, The nova-tox-functional-* jobs on the openstack/nova master branch are currently failing 100% of the time: https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=nova-tox-functional-py38&branch=… This is due to another issue with time overrides (a lack thereof) in the test_archive_task_logs functional tests. The same bug has happened in the past and the fix is now known to have been unsuccessful: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1934519 Another fix has been proposed here: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/803106 Please hold your rechecks until the fix merges and apologies for the trouble. -melwitt

2 2

[TripleO] centos7 gate blocker (stable/train) please hold rechecks
by Marios Andreou 02 Aug '21

02 Aug '21

Hello tripleo o/ new gate blocker for centos7 hitting stable/train tripleo repos https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=tripleo-ci-centos-7-co… bug is at https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1938079 - hitting stable/train (we only run c7 jobs there). investigation/resolution ongoing please hold rechecks for centos7 jobs. thank you

2 3

[cinder-backup][ceph] replicate volume between sites
by Tony Liu 31 Jul '21

31 Jul '21

Hi, I have two sites with OpenStack Victoria deployed by Kolla and Ceph Octopus deployed by cephadm. As what I know, either Swift (implemented by RADOSGW) or RBD is supported to be the backend of cinder-backup. My intention is to use one of those option to replicate Cinder volume from one site to another, based on RADOSGW multi-site support or RBD mirroring. I wonder if anyone has done this and could share some opinions, like pros, cons, which way is better for which case? One specific thing I am not clear is that, how to import RBD volume into Cinder when it gets to another site. There used to be a way, but it's replicated. Any comments is appreciated. Thanks! Tony

1 1