- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

Kolla-ansible Openstack deployment failed in nova-compute task
by ldemarco＠sinthera.com 11 Dec '25

11 Dec '25

Hi guys, In my first openstack deploy I facing an error in deployment phase. The bootstrap-servers phase and the prechecks phase working fine but the deploy phase stop to work in nova-compute task deployment with the following error [ERROR]: Task failed: Action failed. Origin: /root/kolla-venv/share/kolla-ansible/ansible/roles/nova-cell/tasks/wait_discover_computes.yml:24:7 22 expected_compute_service_hosts: "{{ virt_compute_service_hosts + ironic_compute_service_hosts }}" 23 block: 24 - name: Waiting for nova-compute services to register themselves looking for the nova-compute docker logs I found this event ERROR MissingRequiredSource: /var/lib/kolla/config_files/ceph.client.cinder.keyring file is not found I would you like to point out that the ceph keyring are created and copied to /etc/koll/config/nova in deployment host and /etc/ceph in all openstack host. Some one could help me for fix the issue ? Regards Luca

4 4

migrate ovs to ovn
by Eduardo Morais 11 Dec '25

11 Dec '25

Hey, good afternoon. My name is Eduardo and I’m new to OpenStack. At my job I have a task to migrate OVS to OVN, and I was able to do that, but I have a small question about a problem I'm facing after restarting my environment. When I restart my testing VM and try again, after the migration I get an error message in the Neutron logs about a duplicate entry. The message says that OVN is trying to insert information into the providerresourceassociations table, but the table already has that information and OpenStack works with it. However, after the restart, OpenStack crashes. To make it work again, I have to manually delete the existing entry so the new one can be inserted, and after doing that the problem does not happen anymore, send now for the correct mail, i think.

2 2

[neutron] Drivers meeting canceled Friday, December 12th
by Brian Haley 10 Dec '25

10 Dec '25

Hello Neutrinos: I am going to cancel Friday's Drivers meeting as I will be out the rest of the week. Just a reminder that our open spec list at [0]. Have a nice weekend! -Brian [0] https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+project:openstack/neutron-specs

1 0

[neutron] Neutron L3 HA Issue: Packet Loss and Route Flapping After Restarting openvswitch-vswitchd on Active Controller
by soheil.bakan＠gmail.com 10 Dec '25

10 Dec '25

Hi OpenStack Community, I am experiencing an issue in a 3-controller HA OpenStack environment related to Neutron L3 HA and Open vSwitch. I would appreciate your guidance or any insights. ### Environment - OpenStack version: 2025.1 - 3 controller nodes with HA setup (kolla-ansible) - Neutron L3 HA enabed - OVS + Keepalived (VRRP) - The router’s VRRP master role is currently on one controller - All controllers share the same external/provider network setup ### Issue Description When I restart the `openvswitch-vswitchd` service on the controller node that currently holds the VRRP Master for an HA router: The following problems occur: 1. ICMP traffic (ping) drops for several minutes. 2. The router’s default route begins to bounce between the other two or three controllers. 3. The VRRP master does not stabilize quickly; it keeps flipping between the remaining controllers. 4. As a result, I see packet loss and routing instability for several seconds. ### What I expect Ideally, when `openvswitch-vswitchd` restarts on the master controller: - VRRP should quickly fail over to one of the standby controllers routers - The default route should converge and remain stable - There should be no (or minimal) packet loss I should also say what when i restart neutron_l3_agent or in some cases openvswitch_db issue goes away ### Additional Information If needed, I can share: - Logs from OVS, neutron-l3-agent Thanks in advance for your support. Please let me know if more information is needed. best regards, soheil

3 2

[octavia] Weekly Octavia IRC meeting cancelled until January 7th
by Michael Johnson 10 Dec '25

10 Dec '25

Hello everyone, With the holiday season occurring in various parts of the world, we decided at today's meeting that we will cancel the weekly IRC meeting until January 7th, 2026. I look forward to chatting with you all in the new year! Michael

1 0

[qa] This week QA office hour is canceled
by Ghanshyam Maan 09 Dec '25

09 Dec '25

Hi All, This week QA office hour is canceled. - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting -gmaan

1 0

[tc][all] OpenStack Technical Committee Weekly Summary and Meeting Agenda (2026.1/R-16)
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 08 Dec '25

08 Dec '25

Hello Stackers, We're sixteen weeks away from the date of the coordinated release of OpenStack 2026.1 "Gazpacho" [1]. Project teams are reviewing design specifications and observing spec freezes to advance designs to the implementation phase. In the past week, the OpenStack Technical Committee didn't merge any new governance updates; however, a few change proposals are undergoing community review. We're looking for volunteers to shadow the election officials as they set up and run the TC and PTL elections for the 2026.2 release cycle. If you're interested, please reach out to me, or drop by the #openstack-election IRC channel on OFTC. === Weekly Meeting === The last meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee occurred on December 2nd, 2025, in the #openstack-tc IRC channel on OFTC [2]. The TC reviewed several outstanding tasks, one of which was the direction in which the FIPS compliance goal was proceeding. This cross-project goal [3] is being moved back to "proposed" status, seeking feedback regarding testing and a goal champion. The focus of the meeting was a deep dive into the friction surrounding significant changes within the community. The TC acknowledged a growing sentiment that existing governance processes are perceived as "bad bureaucracy," creating a situation where policies suffer from "bit rot." For example, we've long had a PTI for Golang despite a lack of actual use—because contributors feel that attempting to update these rules is futile or destined for rejection. We debated potential remedies, such as reviving the "Ideas" repository [4], but concluded that the root issue lies in some outdated guiding documents and practices. The consensus was that the challenges in making big changes stem from a misalignment between current reality and codified policy, leading to a culture where contributors assume the rules cannot be touched. Consequently, we noted that we'd like to review and rewrite the "Technical Vision" document [5]. Since vision statements are intended to be time-bounded, the current version should be considered obsolete. We hope that refreshing this high-level document will serve as the foundation to subsequently prune outdated policies and demonstrate that the community's norms are not immutable. This discussion will continue in this week's meeting that will be held today, December 9th, 2025, in the #openstack-tc channel on OFTC at 1700 UTC. Please see the agenda on the meeting's wiki page [6]. I hope you'll be able to join us there. === Governance Proposals === ==== Open For Review ==== - Show SIG repositories on the SIGs page | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/967425 - Alter public cloud SIG chair | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/969371 - Move FIPS Compliance goal back to proposed | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/969145 === Upcoming Events === - 2025-12-09: OpenInfra Board meeting: https://board.openinfra.org/ - 2025-12-12: Athens OpenStack User Group Meetup: https://meetup.com/athens-openstack-user-group/events/312235216 - 2025-12-16: Twelve Clouds of Christmas: https://www.meetup.com/openinfra-austin/events/312269596 - 2026-01-08: 2026.1 Milestone 2 - 2026-01-27: OpenInfra Board Meeting: https://board.openinfra.org/ Thank you very much for reading! On behalf of the OpenStack TC, Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr) OpenStack TC Chair [1] 2026.1 "Gazpacho" Release Schedule: https://releases.openstack.org/gazpacho/schedule.html [2] TC Meeting IRC Log, Dec 2 2025: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-12-02-17.00.html [3] FIPS Compliance Goal: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/fips.html [4] Ideas for OpenStack: https://governance.openstack.org/ideas/ [5] Vision for OpenStack Clouds: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/technical-vision.html [6] TC Meeting Agenda, Dec 9 2025: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting

1 0

[octavia] compute id for a Octavia pool member
by Max Harmathy 08 Dec '25

08 Dec '25

Hello OpenStack community, I regularly face the following problem: From time to time I get notified about issues with some load-balancers where often the issue lies in connectivity between the health monitor and some of the pool members. Now for investigating the problem I often need to know the ID of the server (compute id) for a certain pool member. I haven't found a straightforward way, since the information the OpenStack client provides for a given pool member (openstack loadbalancer member show ...) doesn't include the compute id. I usually try to find out the IP address of the pool member and then match that against the list of servers. But that process is quite tedious. Is there a better way to do this natively or has someone made a tool for that job? Regards, Max -- Max Harmathy UhuruTec AG Tel +49 151 16 341 719 max.harmathy(a)uhurutec.com https://www.uhurutec.com Industriestraße 4 D-70565 Stuttgart Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Maximilian Buchberger Vorstand: Matthias Haag, Jan Klippel Registergericht Stuttgart, HRB 785603 USt-IdNr: DE354021144

3 3

[all][dev][ops][tc] Bridging the gap between community and contributing orgs
by Jeremy Stanley 08 Dec '25

08 Dec '25

The tl;dr on this is that I'm opening a broad community discussion on how we can, collectively through improved communication, better bring together our established contributors with casual and prospective contributors who struggle to find successful patterns of contribution, so that we might all support each other in order to benefit OpenStack as a whole. Read on for details... OpenStack's TC has requested that foundation staff, when in conversation with representatives of member organizations, encourage participation in the project and collect feedback on any related challenges those organizations encounter in their attempts to do so. In order to better understand the feedback and brainstorm achievable recommendations for the broader community[*], Community Managers on the foundation staff started to work with a small focus group of established contributors with a solid understanding of what successful patterns of contribution look like. It also came to light that established contributors experience many of the same sorts of challenges, even more so if they don't have the luxury of focusing full-time upstream, and so success often comes down to knowing how to effectively navigate those challenges. The community's goal with this exercise is to improve everyone's experience, and your help is needed to do that! The most common themes reported by those struggling to contribute are not related to tooling or workflow confusion, but instead seem to come down to basic communication challenges. Ideas so far to address these gaps include: * Review bandwidth - Ensure contributors and companies understand the importance and benefits of code review - Incentivize and credit meaningful "+1" reviews more - Understand that the volume of changes and limited reviewer bandwidth often means proposals aren't reviewed quickly (or at all), and their proponents may need some additional tenacity and engagement with the team to get their work noticed - Utilize "review dashboards" as a way to find stale changes which have fallen through the cracks * Review strategy and etiquette - Be clear about the meaning of votes on changes, especially negative ones, and set explicit timelines for things like "procedural -2" or WIP blocks when their approval needs to be delayed - Focus on comments and requests that affect whether or not the change can be merged after the fixes are submitted, rather than requesting trivial adjustments to an unsuitable change which has more fundamental problems - Reciprocate with reviews of changes from new reviewers you see leaving insubstantial reviews, demonstrating to them what deeper and more meaningful reviewing looks like * Mentoring newcomers - Established contributors with sufficient bandwidth can help mentoring newcomers, potential core reviewers and new leaders - Mentoring can happen as part of internship programs as well as by helping newcomers determined to become active contributors; both ways should be embraced and utilized What challenges are you facing? And, how would you improve them? Two weeks from now, we'll have a forum session at the OpenInfra Summit Asia in Suwon[**] where our community can refine these possible approaches and integrate others, as well as bring attention to them and promote their application. I've also proposed a similar forum session for OpenInfra Days North America in Indianapolis a month after that, where we can hopefully continue this conversation. The goal for this multi-stage effort is to improve the contribution experience for established participants, casual contributors and newcomers alike. While it's easy to jump to blaming in these situations, it will be far more productive if we can focus on the challenges and experiences that we would each like to remove or improve for ourselves and others in our community. As we find ways together to improve our efficiency, we can reduce the load on all contributors and lower the barriers for people to join and participate. [*] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/r.2205024e55689bccb82c20c960853cb5 [**] https://2024.openinfraasia.org/a/schedule#view=calendar&title=Bridging%20th… -- Jeremy Stanley

2 14

[all][oslo][cinder][glance][nova][sdk][trove] Upcoming migration of whereto to PCRE2
by Takashi Kajinami 08 Dec '25

08 Dec '25

Hi ! I'm sending this email so that you'd be aware of an upcoming breaking change in the whereto library, because you might need to update your projects (especially their bindep.txt files) to adopt your projects to the change. The whereto library is a tiny library to generate redirect rules in Apache and has been used in documentation build in several projects. This library has been dependent on python-pcre, which requires the following packages. - libpcre3-dev in Debian-based operating systems (such as Debian or Ubuntu) - pcre-devel in RHEL-based operating systems (such as RHEL or CentOS Stream) However these packages are no longer provided by newer operating systems and we have to replace these by PCRE 2. - Debian removed libpcre3-dev because PCRE 3 is obsolete and it is recommended to replace it by PCRE 2 [1]. - RHEL 10 removed PCRE and PCRE 2 is a recommended replacement. I've already proposed the change[1] of whereto to replace python-pcre by pcre2 (which requires pcre2 packages from OS). I'll create a new release of whereto shortly after this change is merged. Once the new release hits the upper constraints, libpcre3-dev and pcre-devel in bindep.txt in each repository should be replaced. See [3] to learn how the change should look like. So far I'm planning to take care of this transition, but it'd be nice if I can ask for some attention about it. Please let me know if you have any question. Thank you, Takashi [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/11/msg00176.html [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/whereto/+/970061 [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/whereto/+/970061/4/bindep.txt -- Takashi Kajinami irc: tkajinam github: https://github.com/kajinamit launchpad: https://launchpad.net/~kajinamit

1 0