- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-18 Update
by Matt Riedemann 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

First, I'm sorry about the big gap in updates, the last one being before the summit. Things have been busy elsewhere. Second, I'm happy to report the majority of projects have merged the initial framework patch for the "$project-status upgrade check" command. There are a few outstanding patches for projects which need core review (I went through this list today and +1 on them): https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:upgrade-checkers+status:open There are a few projects adding real upgrade checks as well, like designate and cloudkitty, which is good to see. For projects that have already merged the framework check, please talk in your meetings about what "real" upgrade check you could add in stein to replace the placeholder/sample check that came with the framework patch. Note that checks added in stein don't necessarily need to be for stein upgrade issues, they could be for something that was an upgrade impact in rocky, queens, etc, because with fast-forward upgrades people will be rolling through and might have missed something in the release notes. If you have questions, feel free to reach out to me in #openstack-dev (mriedem) or reply to this thread. -- Thanks, Matt

1 0

What's Happening in the Open Infrastructure Community
by Allison Price 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

Hi everyone, This week, we distributed the first Open Infrastructure Community Newsletter. Our goal with the bi-weekly newsletter is to provide a digest of the latest developments and activities across open infrastructure projects, events and users. This week, we highlighted the Berlin Summit as well as brief updates from OpenStack as well as the OSF's four pilot projects: Airship, Kata Containers, StarlingX and Zuul. You can checkout the full newsletter on Superuser [1], and if you are interested in receiving the upcoming newsletters, you can subscribe here [2]. If you would like to contribute or have feedback, please reach out to community(a)openstack.org. Thanks! Allison Allison Price OpenStack Foundation allison(a)openstack.org [1] http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/inside-open-infrastructure-newslett… [2] https://www.openstack.org/community/email-signup

1 0

Proposing KaiFeng Wang for ironic-core
by Julia Kreger 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

I'd like to propose adding KaiFeng to the ironic-core reviewer group. Previously, we had granted KaiFeng rights on ironic-inspector-core and I personally think they have done a great job there. Kaifeng has also been reviewing other repositories in ironic's scope[1]. Their reviews and feedback have been insightful and meaningful. They have also been very active[2] at reviewing which is an asset for any project. I believe they will be an awesome addition to the team. -Julia [1]: http://stackalytics.com/?module=ironic-group&user_id=kaifeng [2]: http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/ironic-group/90

5 4

[TC] Forum TC Vision Retrospective summary
by Julia Kreger 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

During the Forum in Berlin, the Technical Committee along with interested community members took some time to look back at the vision that written in early 2017. We had three simple questions: * What went well? * What needs improvement? * What should the next steps be? To summarize, the group thought the vision helped guide some thoughts and decisions. Helped provide validation on what was thought to be important. We have seen adjacent communities fostered. We didn't solely focus on the vision which was viewed as a positive as things do change over time. It helped us contrast, and in the process of writing the vision we reached the use of the same words. Most importantly, we learned that we took on too much work. As with most retrospectives, the list of things that needed improvement was a bit longer. There was some perception that it fell off the map, and that not every item received work. Possibly that we even took the vision too literally and too detailed as opposed to use it as more a guiding document to help us evolve as time goes on. There was consensus that there was still room to improve and that we could have done a better at conveying context to express how, what, and why. For next steps, we feel that it is time to revise the vision, albeit in a shorter form. We also felt that there could be a vision for the TC itself, which led to the discussion of providing clarity to the role of the Technical Committee. As for action items and next steps that we reached consensus on: * To refine the technical vision document. * That it was time to compose a new vision for the community. * Consensus was reached that there should be a vision of the TC itself, and as part of this have a living document that describes the "Role of the TC". ** ttx, cdent, and TheJulia have volunteered to continue those discussions. ** mnaser would start a discussion with the community as to what the TC should and shouldn't do. For those reading this, please remember that the TC's role is defined in the foundation bylaws, so this would be more of a collection of perceptions. * TheJulia to propose a governance update to suggest that people proposing TC candidacy go ahead and preemptively seek to answer the question of what the candidate perceives as the role of the TC. The etherpad that followed the discussion can be found at: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BER-tc-vision-retrospective -Julia

3 3

[nova] Stein forum session notes
by melanie witt 05 Dec '18

05 Dec '18

Hey all, Here's some notes I took in forum sessions I attended -- feel free to add notes on sessions I missed. Etherpad links: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Berlin2018 Cheers, -melanie TUE --- Cells v2 updates ================ - Went over the etherpad, no objections to anything - Not directly related to the session, but CERN (hallway track) and NeCTAR (dev ML) have both given feedback and asked that the policy-driven idea for handling quota for down cells be avoided. Revived the "propose counting quota in placement" spec to see if there's any way forward here Getting users involved in the project ===================================== - Disconnect between SIGs/WGs and project teams - Too steep a first step to get involved by subscribing to ML - People confused about how to participate Community outreach when culture, time zones, and language differ ================================================================ - Most discussion around how to synchronize real-time communication considering different time zones - Best to emphasize asynchronous communication. Discussion on ML and gerrit reviews - Helpful to create weekly meeting agenda in advance so contributors from other time zones can add notes/response to discussion items WED --- NFV/HPC pain points =================== Top issues for immediate action: NUMA-aware live migration (spec just needs re-approval), improved scheduler logging (resurrect cfriesen's patch and clean it up), distant third is SRIOV live migration BFV improvements ================ - Went over the etherpad, no major objections to anything - Agree: we should expose boot_index from the attachments API - Unclear what to do about post-create delete_on_termination. Being able to specify it for attach sounds reasonable, but is it enough for those asking? Or would it end up serving no one? Better expose what we produce ============================= - Project teams should propose patches to openstack/openstack-map to improve their project pages - Would be ideal if project pages included a longer paragraph explaining the project, have a diagram, list SIGs/WGs related to the project, etc Blazar reservations to new resource types ========================================= - For nova compute hosts, reservations are done by putting reserved hosts into "blazar" host aggregate and then a special scheduler filter is used to exclude those hosts from scheduling. But how to extend that concept to other projects? - Note: the nova approach will change from scheduler filter => placement request filter Edge use cases and requirements =============================== - Showed the reference architectures again - Most popular use case was "Mobile service provider 5G/4G virtual RAN deployment and Edge Cloud B2B2X" with seven +1s on the etherpad Deletion of project and project resources ========================================= - What is wanted: a delete API per service that takes a project_id and force deletes all resources owned by it with --dry-run component - Challenge to work out the dependencies for the order of deletion of all resources in all projects. Disable project, then delete things in order of dependency - Idea: turn os-purge into a REST API and each project implement a plugin for it Getting operators' bug fixes upstreamed ======================================= - Problem: operator reports a bug and provides a solution, for example, pastes a diff in launchpad or otherwise describes how to fix the bug. How can we increase the chances of those fixes making it to gerrit? - Concern: are there legal issues with accepting patches pasted into launchpad by someone who hasn't signed the ICLA? - Possible actions: create a best practices guide tailored for operators and socialize it among the ops docs/meetup/midcycle group. Example: guidance on how to indicate you don't have time to add test coverage, etc when you propose a patch THU --- Bug triage: why not all the community? ====================================== - Cruft and mixing tasks with defect reports makes triage more difficult to manage. Example: difference between a defect reported by a user vs an effective TODO added by a developer. If New bugs were reliably from end users, would we be more likely to triage? - Bug deputy weekly ML reporting could help - Action: copy the generic portion of the nova bug triage wiki doc into the contributor guide docs. The idea/hope being that easy-to-understand instructions available to the wider community might increase the chances of people outside of the project team being capable of triaging bugs, so all of it doesn't fall on project teams - Idea: should we remove the bug supervisor requirement from nova to allow people who haven't joined the bug team to set Status and Importance? Current state of volume encryption ================================== - Feedback: public clouds can't offer encryption because keys are stored in the cloud. Telcos are required to make sure admin can't access secrets. Action: SecuStack has a PoC for E2E key transfer, mnaser to help see what could be upstreamed - Features needed: ability for users to provide keys or use customer barbican or other key store. Thread: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-November/136258.html Cross-technical leadership session (OpenStack, Kata, StarlingX, Airship, Zuul) ======================================================================== - Took down the structure of how leadership positions work in each project on the etherpad, look at differences - StarlingX taking a new approach for upstreaming, New strategy: align with master, analyze what they need, and address the gaps (as opposed to pushing all the deltas up). Bug fixes still need to be brought forward, that won't change Concurrency limits for service instance creation ================================================ - Looking for ways to test and detect changes in performance as a community. Not straightforward because test hardware must stay consistent in order to detect performance deltas, release to release. Infra can't provide such an environment - Idea: it could help to write up a doc per project with a list of the usual tunables and basic info about how to use them Change of ownership of resources ================================ - Ignore the network piece for now, it's the most complicated. Being able to transfer everything else would solve 90% of City Network's use cases - Some ideas around having this be a keystone auth-based access granting instead of an update of project/user, but if keystone could hand user A a token for user B, that token would apply to all resources of user B's, not just the ones desired for transfer Update on placement extraction from nova ======================================== - Upgrade step additions from integrated placement to extracted placement in TripleO and OpenStackAnsible are being worked on now - Reshaper patches for libvirt and xenapi drivers are up for review - Lab test for vGPU upgrade and reshape + new schedule for libvirt driver patch has been done already - FFU script work needs an owner. Will need to query libvirtd to get mdevs and use PlacementDirect to populate placement Python bindings for the placement API ===================================== - Placement client code replicated in different projects: nova, blazar, neutron, cyborg. Want to commonize into python bindings lib - Consensus was that the placement bindings should go into openstacksdk and then projects will consume it from there T series community goal discussion ================================== - Most popular goal ideas: Finish moving legacy python-*client CLIs to python-openstackclient, Deletion of project resources as discussed in forum session earlier in the week, ensure all projects use ServiceTokens when calling one another with incoming token

10 17

OpenStack Summit Berlin Videos Now Available
by Jimmy McArthur 05 Dec '18

05 Dec '18

Thank you again for a wonderful Summit in Berlin. I'm pleased to announce the Summit Videos are now up on the openstack.org website: https://www.openstack.org/videos/summits/berlin-2018 If there was a session you missed, now is your chance to catch up! These videos will also be available in the Summit App as well as on the web under the Berlin Summit Schedule (https://www.openstack.org/summit/berlin-2018/summit-schedule/) If you have any questions or concerns about the videos, please write speakersupport(a)openstack.org. Cheers, Jimmy

8 13

[openstack][diskimage-builder] How to install software packages at building murano-agent image
by zhaolihuisky 05 Dec '18

05 Dec '18

hi, guys How to install software packages at building murano-agent image. I have download telegraf-x.x.x-x86_64.rpm file and how to install this package into murano-agent image. Is there any suggestion? Best Regards.

2 1

[cloudkitty] IRC Meeting of the 7/12 will exceptionally happen at 9h AM UTC
by Luka Peschke 05 Dec '18

05 Dec '18

Hello, After discussion on IRC, it has been decided that the next CloudKitty IRC meeting (which was supposed to happen at 15h UTC on the 7/12) will exceptionally be held at 9h UTC (10h CET) on the same day. The schedule for other meetings remains unchanged (First friday of each month at 15h UTC). Cheers, -- Luka Peschke Développeur +33 (0) 5 82 95 65 36 5 rue du Moulin Bayard - 31000 Toulouse www.objectif-libre.com

1 0

[ptl] [openstack-map] New tags for OpenStack Project Map
by Jimmy McArthur 05 Dec '18

05 Dec '18

Following up on this thread from ttx [1], we are continuing to enhance the content on the OpenStack Project Map [2],[3] through new tags that are managed through the openstack-map repo [4]. * video (id, title, description) - This controls the Project Update video you see on the project page. I've just pushed a review adding all of the Project Updates for Berlin [5] * depends-on - Things that are a strong dependency. This should be used ONLY if your component requires another one to work (e.g. nova -> glance) * see-also - Should list things that are a week dependency or an adjacent relevant thing * support-teams (name: link) - This is meant to give credit to adjacent projects that aren't necessary to run the software (e.g. Oslo, i18n, Docs). We are still determining how best to implement this tag, but we feel it's important to give some credit to these other teams that are so critical in helping to maintain, support, and build OpenStack If you have some time, please go to the git repo [4] and review your project and help flesh out these new tags (or update old ones) so we can display them in the Project Map [2]. Cheers, Jimmy [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2018-November/000178… [2] https://www.openstack.org/software/project-navigator/openstack-components [3] https://www.openstack.org/assets/software/projectmap/openstack-map.pdf [4] https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/openstack-map/ [5] https://review.openstack.org/622485

3 3

[tripleo] [validations] Replacement of undercloud_conf module
by Emilien Macchi 05 Dec '18

05 Dec '18

Hi folks, Context: https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1805825 Today I randomly found this module: https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-validations/blob/d21e7fa30f9be15bb9802… And it gave me 2 ideas, as I think we don't need this module and would consider it as technical debt at this point: - it's relying on a file, which isn't super safe and flexible IMHO. - a lot of validations rely on Hieradata which isn't safe either, we saw it with the Containerized Undercloud. So I propose that: - we export require parameters via the Heat templates into Ansible variables - we consume these variables from tripleo-validations (can be in the inventory or a dedicated var file for validations). So that way we remove the dependency on having the undercloud.conf access from Mistral Executor and also stop depending on Puppet (hieradata) which we don't guarantee to be here in the future. Can someone from TripleO validations team ack this email and put this work in your backlog? If you need assistance we're happy to help but I believe this is an important effort to avoid technical debt here. Thanks, -- Emilien Macchi

4 5