February 2025 - openstack-discuss

Separate the read/write SQL requests
by Mia 24 Feb '25

24 Feb '25

Hi OpenStack community, I'm currently working on read/write database splitting in my OpenStack environment using this document: https://docs.openstack.org/large-scale/journey/configure/database.html#reve… Here is what I've done up to this point: - Configured HAProxy as recommended - Added the slave_connection parameter to all service configurations(nova.conf, cinder.conf, etc.) To test this, I enabled MariaDB's general_log on all nodes. However, upon checking the logs, most SELECT queries still reach the first database node instead of the other replicas. Did I miss a configuration step somewhere? Any guidance would be super helpful.

3 3

Re: CLI clients and neutron QoS packet_rate_limit rules
by Nell Jerram 24 Feb '25

24 Feb '25

FYI the attached patches, against openstacksdk 0.62.0 and python-openstackclient 5.8.1, allow me to successfully execute `openstack network qos rule create --type packet-rate-limit --max-kpps 111 --ingress bw-limiter`. (I'm using those old base versions because of testing against a Yoga system.) If I may whinge for a brief moment: it's quite tedious that boilerplate changes are needed in multiple different places for this change. I'm only really saying this in case there are others who agree and my opinion might help to build their case... Best wishes - Nell On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 9:46 AM Nell Jerram <nell(a)tigera.io> wrote: > Many thanks Rodolfo. I'll experiment locally with possible fixes here, > and follow up later. > > Best wishes - Nell > > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 4:22 PM Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez < > ralonsoh(a)redhat.com> wrote: > >> Hi Nell: >> >> The neutronclient project is now deprecated, at least the CLI part. As >> you mentioned, the OSC cannot create these packet rate rules. I'll create a >> bug. >> >> Regards. >> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 7:04 PM Nell Jerram <nell(a)tigera.io> wrote: >> >>> Is it just an oversight that the openstack client doesn't support >>> packet_rate_limit rules? [1] >>> >>> Looking at the file names under [2], it looks like that might be true >>> for the neutron client as well. >>> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/openstack/python-openstackclient/blob/master/openstackcl… >>> >>> [2] >>> https://github.com/openstack/python-neutronclient/tree/master/neutronclient… >>> >>> Best wishes - Nell >>> >>>

2 2

[neutron] Bug deputy report from week of 17th February
by Sławek Kapłoński 24 Feb '25

24 Feb '25

Hi, I was bug deputy last week. Here's summary of what new bugs do we have and their current state: ### Critical - none ### High - none ### Medium - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2098996 - empty_string_filtering extension is not enabled for ML2/OVN - fix already proposed: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/942387 - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2099450 - Incorrect ovsdb_connection validation - fix already proposed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/942412 - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2099706 - [OVN][QoS] QoS rule addition to an exiting net work policy only updates the first port - assigned to Rodolfo, patch proposed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/942516 - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2099755 - # [whitebox-neutron-tempest-plugin] ``QosTestExternalNetwork.test_dscp_bwlimit_external_network`` must check BW with VMs on different compute nodes - assigned to Rodolfo ### Low - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2098815 - # attempting to write bad value to column external_ids (ovsdb error: expected string, got <class 'NoneType'>) - assigned to Terry and already have fix proposed, - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2099798 - error when running `osken` in os_ken CLI in python 3.13 - this is osken bug impacting osken CLI tool (I didn't even know there is something like that there :)) - needs volunteer if we want to fix it, - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2099799 - `os_ken.topology.switches` cannot be stopped when observing links - yet another os-ken bug, needs volunteer ### RFE - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2098736 - [RFE] Use quota engine to replace config option "max_allowed_address_pair" - needs owner, - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2098737 - # Create a restricted default policy for undefined API calls - this needs owner but I may most likely take ownership of it, it may also require some oslo_policy changes but I am not sure about it yet, - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2099818 - ovn-sync add -reported by and already assigned to Kevin Carter, ### To triage - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2099675 - trunk subport vnic_type not inherited from parent, DHCP for baremetal ports does not work - this one deeds to be checked by someone who knows more about trunk and baremetal ports in OVN, ### Invalid (for Neutron) - https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-openstackclient/+bug/2098980 - "openstack port list -c" showing non existing columns - I moved it to be OSC bug, not the neutron one, needs assignment, should be low-hanging-fruit bug to fix -- Slawek Kaplonski Principal Software Engineer Red Hat

1 0

[designate] Kubernetes External-DNS webhook provider for OpenStack Designate
by Christian Rohmann 23 Feb '25

23 Feb '25

Hello openstack-discuss, the external-dns [1] controller is the de-facto standard to integrate Kubernetes with DNS services, one of them being OpenStack Designate. 1) For quite a while there is a push to move the provider specific code out of tree, see [2], [3]. With (larger) changes not being reviewed / merged for the in-tree Designate code, [4] we bit the bullet and wrote a webhook provider implementation for OpenStack Designate, [5], which I also proposed to be added to the list of new providers via [6]. If you are running Kubernetes on top of OpenStack, I kindly ask you to give this webhook a try and see if it works or if there are still some kinks to iron out. If so: Open helpful issues, send PRs! 2) I am also reaching out to see if potentially you would even want to adopt this project as OpenStack Designate. While one could argue that it's out of OpenStack Designates element to care about Kubernetes. I believe a good integration and well working interfaces are key to keep OpenStack attractive as a platform (to run Kubernetes on). And with the webhook provider being an independent piece of software, just implementing the webhook provider interface [7], the contact surface with Kubernetes is very limited to non-existing. It's mostly Gophercloud ([8]) calling the Designate-API for the DNS record management actions external-dns requires. Looking a bit more closely to this widely used controller hitting the Designate-API might give also provide good insights or ideas for improvements or in the very least facilitates adoption. Regards Christian [1] https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns [2] https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns/issues/4347 [3] https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns?tab=readme-ov-file#status-o… [4] https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns/pull/3024 [5] https://github.com/inovex/external-dns-designate-webhook [6] https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns/pull/5115 [7] https://kubernetes-sigs.github.io/external-dns/v0.15.1/docs/tutorials/webho… [8] https://github.com/gophercloud/gophercloud

1 0

CLI clients and neutron QoS packet_rate_limit rules
by Nell Jerram 22 Feb '25

22 Feb '25

Is it just an oversight that the openstack client doesn't support packet_rate_limit rules? [1] Looking at the file names under [2], it looks like that might be true for the neutron client as well. [1] https://github.com/openstack/python-openstackclient/blob/master/openstackcl… [2] https://github.com/openstack/python-neutronclient/tree/master/neutronclient… Best wishes - Nell

2 1

[release] Release countdown for week R-5
by Thierry Carrez 21 Feb '25

21 Feb '25

Development Focus ----------------- We are getting close to the end of the 2025.1 Epoxy cycle! Next week on February 27th, 2025 is the Epoxy-3 milestone, also known as feature freeze. It's time to wrap up feature work in the services and their client libraries, and defer features that won't make it to the 2025.2 Flamingo cycle. General Information ------------------- This coming week is the deadline for client libraries: their last feature release needs to happen before "Client library freeze" on February 27th, 2025. Only bugfix releases will be allowed beyond this point. When requesting those library releases, you can also include the stable/2025.1 branching request with the review. As an example, see the "branches" section here: https://opendev.org/openstack/releases/src/branch/master/deliverables/pike/… February 27th, 2025 is also the deadline for feature work in all OpenStack deliverables following the cycle-with-rc model. To help those projects produce a first release candidate in time, only bugfixes should be allowed in the master branch beyond this point. Any feature work past that deadline has to be raised as a Feature Freeze Exception (FFE) and approved by the team PTL. Finally, feature freeze is also a good time for submitting a first version of your cycle-highlights. Cycle highlights are the raw data that helps shape what is communicated in press releases and other release activity at the end of the cycle, avoiding direct contacts from marketing folks. See https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/release-management.html#cycle… for more details. Upcoming Deadlines & Dates -------------------------- Epoxy-3 milestone (feature freeze): February 27th, 2025 (R-5 week) RC1 deadline: March 14th (R-3 week) Final RC deadline: March 28th (R-1 week) Final 2025.1 Epoxy release: April 2nd, 2025 Project Teams Gathering (virtual): April 7th-11th, 2025 -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)

1 0

[neutron] Drivers meeting canceled Friday, February 21st
by Brian Haley 21 Feb '25

21 Feb '25

Hello Neutrinos: I'm going to cancel tomorrow's drivers meeting as I have a conflict. We can cover an RFEs added this week next Friday. Just a reminder there are still open specs that need review, list is at [0]. Have a nice weekend! -Brian [0] https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+project:openstack/neutron-specs

1 0

OVN in latest OpenStack
by Jani Heikkinen 20 Feb '25

20 Feb '25

We have been installing openstack Dalmatian based on Debian packages on our institution. I am currently trying to configure OVN neutron metadata service, but it seems very hard to find how OVN actually currently does it. See [1.]. The documentation states first, that ovn-metadata-agent will run with a netns and haproxy instance on hypervisor. But there is also a reference to having metadata support in ovn-controller. In addition, I have seen hints suggesting that neutron-ovn-agent and neutron-ovn-metadata-agent would be exclusive to each other. What is the currently up-to-date way to configure OVN metadata agent? Especially, is there any up-to-date instructions how to properly configure neutron's related config files? We have following versions of ovn and ovs: openvswitch-common 3.1.0-2 (+deb12u1) ovn-common 23.03.1-1 (~deb12u2) ovn-host 23.03.1-1 (~deb12u2) neutron-ovn-metadata-agent 2:25.0.0 (-5~bpo12+1) neutron-ovn-agent 2:25.0.0 (-5~bpo12+1) Best Regards, Jani Heikkinen [1.] https://docs.openstack.org/networking-ovn/latest/contributor/design/metadat… -- Berner Fachhochschule / Bern University of Applied Sciences IT-Services / Team Linux & Infrastructure Services Jani Heikkinen IT Linux Engineer ___________________________________________________________ Dammweg 3, CH-3013 Bern Telefon direkt +41 31 848 68 14 Telefon Servicedesk +41 31 848 48 48 jani.heikkinen(a)bfh.ch

5 10

how to clear instance actions
by Jiatong Shen 20 Feb '25

20 Feb '25

Hello Experts, During operating an old deployment, we found that instance_action as well as instance_action_event stores many records. The instance with actions are still in use. I would like to ask if there is any tool to clear instance action & events? Thank you very much for your help. -- Best Regards, Jiatong Shen

2 1

[all][elections][tc] 2025.2 cycle TC Election Campaigning Kickoff
by Ian Y. Choi 20 Feb '25

20 Feb '25

Developers, The TC Election Campaigning Period has now started [1]. Although there are no polls that need to be held [2], during the next couple days, you are all encouraged to ask the candidates questions about their platforms [3], opinions on OpenStack, community governance, and anything else that will help you to better determine how you will vote. This is the time to raise any issues you wish the future TC to consider, and to evaluate the opinions of the nominees prior to their election. TC Candidates, Each of you has posted a platform [3], and announced your nomination to the developers. From this point, you are encouraged to ask each other questions about the posted platforms, and begin discussion of any points that you feel are particularly important during the next cycle. While you are not yet TC members, your voices and opinions about the issues raised in your platforms and questions raised by the wider community will help ensure that the future TC has the widest possible input on the matters of community concern, and the electorate has the best information to determine the ideal TC composition to address these and other issues that may arise. Ian Y. Choi, on behalf of the election officials. [1] https://governance.openstack.org/election/ [2] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… [3] https://opendev.org/openstack/election/src/branch/master/candidates/2025.2/…

1 0