June 2025 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

Re: [Octavia] - Loadbalancer appear offline but are running
by Wells, Aaron 14 Jun '25

14 Jun '25

Hi Karl, We ran into and fixed this issue on our installation by making sure that the UDP heartbeat packets on port 5555 were reaching the controllers. Thanks. Aaron -- Aaron Wells wellsaar(a)iu.edu DevOps Engineer Jetstream 2 https://kb.iu.edu/d/bfde

2 1

[eventlet-removal]When to drop eventlet support
by Balazs Gibizer 14 Jun '25

14 Jun '25

Hi Stackers! I would like to sync about the planned timeline of dropping eventlet support from OpenStack / Oslo. Nova definitely needs at least the full 2026.1 cycle to have a chance to transform the nova-compute service. But this plan already feels stretched based on the progress in the current cycle. So being conservative means we need the 2026.2 cycle as a buffer. Nova would like to keep a release where we support both eventlet and threading in parallel. So that operators can do the switching from eventlet to threading outside of the upgrade procedure. (This was an explicit request from them during the PTG). So 2026.2 could be that version where nova fully supports both concurrency mode, while eventlet can be marked deprecated. Then the 2027.1 release could be the first release dropping eventlet. However we need to align with the SLURP upgrade as well. 2026.1 is a SLURP. But in that release Nova might not be ready to have all services running in threading mode. So the 2026.1 - 2027.1 SLURP upgrade would force the operators to change the concurrency mode during the upgrade itself. I see two ways forward: * A) We say that operators who want to do the concurrency mode change outside of an upgrade could not skip the 2026.2 release, i.e. they cannot do SLURP directly from 2026.1. to 2027.1. * B) We keep supporting the eventlet mode in the 2027.1 release as well and only dropping support in 2028.1. What do you think? Cheers gibi

6 7

Custom Role Configuration for Admin Activities in OpenStack
by Thamanna Farhath 14 Jun '25

14 Jun '25

Hi Team, As part of enhancing our OpenStack RBAC policy management, we are in the process of setting up custom roles for various admin-related activities. Custom Roles Used: admin_instance_read,admin_volume_read,admin_network_read,admin_glance_read Policy Customizations: # Compute - List all instances across tenants "os_compute_api:servers:index:get_all_tenants": "rule:context_is_admin or role:admin_instance_read" "os_compute_api:servers:detail:get_all_tenants": "rule:context_is_admin or role:admin_instance_read" # Network - Get networks (shared/external/own project) "get_network": "(rule:admin_only) or (role:reader and project_id:%(project_id)s) or rule:shared or rule:external or rule:context_is_advsvc or role:admin_network_read" # Volume - List all volumes and snapshots across projects "volume:get_all": "rule:xena_system_admin_or_project_reader or role:admin_volume_read" "volume:get_all_snapshots": "rule:xena_system_admin_or_project_reader or role:admin_volume_read" # Image - List all images including shared/community/public "get_image": "role:admin or (role:reader and project_id:%(project_id)s) or project_id:%(member_id)s or 'community':%(visibility)s or 'public':%(visibility)s or 'shared':%(visibility)s or role:admin_glance_read" "get_images": "role:admin or (role:reader and project_id:%(project_id)s) or role:admin_glance_read" Issue: Despite the above configurations, listing all instances, images, volumes, and networks across all projects still only works for the admin role. The custom roles (e.g., admin_instance_read, etc.) are not taking effect for cross-project visibility as expected. Request: I would appreciate any suggestions or insights on: Whether additional policy bindings or role scopes are required. If any service-specific constraints might be overriding the custom roles. Any known limitations regarding get_all_tenants behavior with custom roles. Thanks & Regards Thamanna Farhath N Associate engineer - R&D Zybisys IT consulting Disclaimer : The content of this email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and remove the messages from your system. If you are not the named addressee, it is strictly forbidden for you to share, circulate, distribute or copy any part of this e-mail to any third party without the written consent of the sender. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secured or error free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late, incomplete, or may contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email."

3 2

[neutron] Neutron BGP integration upstream sync
by Jakub Libosvar 14 Jun '25

14 Jun '25

Hi all, as per the previous suggestions I created the doodle [1] to pick the right time when we could meet. Finding a good timeslot is challenging as I noticed interest from all around the globe (US, EU, Australia). Please vote for which slot fits you best and if anyone has better suggestions, please let me know and let’s discuss. Thanks! Jakub [1] https://doodle.com/group-poll/participate/aK9Nkknd/vote

1 1

[horizon] Cancel weekly meeting on 2025-06-18
by Tatiana Ovchinnikova 14 Jun '25

14 Jun '25

Hello team, I am cancelling the upcoming weekly meeting since most of the members are on PTO. See you all in two weeks, June 25th! With kind regards, Tatiana

1 0

[dev] OpenStack Templateless Provisioning
by prmjh4＠gmail.com 13 Jun '25

13 Jun '25

Do we have any mechanism in OpenStack environment where we do not need an appropriate template already exists in the OpenStack environment in order to create server instance on the OpenStack Cloud programmatically? where we can do the templateless provisioning of the server instance on OpenStack?

5 6

[nova][eventlet-removal]Weekly sync video call
by Balazs Gibizer 13 Jun '25

13 Jun '25

Hi, The Nova core team agreed to have a weekly high bandwidth sync meeting about the ongoing Eventlet removal work. Here are the details: [public]Nova Eventlet removal sync Every Wednesday: 14:30-15:00 UTC (16:30 – 17:00 CEST) Video call link: https://meet.google.com/bcy-uqoz-hje Cheers, gibi

2 1

[neutron] Drivers meeting agenda for Friday, June 13th
by Brian Haley 13 Jun '25

13 Jun '25

Hello Neutrinos: We have one item on the agenda for tomorrow's drivers meeting. Please add anything else to the wiki [0] to discuss if I missed something. * [RFE] Internal DNS resolution with OVS Agent - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2112446 See you tomorrow, -Brian [0] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDrivers

1 0

[designate] It only syncs at reboot
by Alexander Luedtke 13 Jun '25

13 Jun '25

Hello Everyone, I have a strange problem, I wanted the designate services as hidden master, everything works fine, expect that the designate server does only sync with the master DNS server if I do a reboot of the host where the designate docker is on, or I have to restart the designate docker. Has anyone an idea how to fix that ? best regards Alex

2 1

[horizon] Changing the Term “Instance” to “Server” for improved clarity and consistency
by Dmitriy Chubinidze 11 Jun '25

11 Jun '25

Propose changing the term "Instance" to "Server" ( "Instances" to "Servers") in the platform’s user interface. This update will be aiming to improve clarity for users, align with industry terminology, and create a more intuitive experience. "Server" is a more commonly understood term than "Instance", especially for users who are not deeply familiar with cloud computing. Major platforms like AWS and Azure often use "Server" in their UI, even when referring to virtual instances. Adopting this term will make OpenStack easier to use and understand. This change will affect only the visual elements — such as UI labels, menus, and documentation. The underlying code, APIs, and data structures using the term instance will remain unchanged. This ensures there is no impact on functionality or development processes. We are open to feedback and discussion on this proposal.

7 8