- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[horizon][stable] [release] Proposal to make stable/stein as EOL
by vishal manchanda 01 Jun '23

01 Jun '23

Hi all, As discussed in yesterday's Horizon weekly meeting[1] on 2023-05-31, I want to announce that the Horizon team decided to move the stable/stein branch as EOL. Consider this mail as an official announcement of that. The gate for horizon stable/stein is failing for the last few months [2]. I would like to know if anyone still wants to keep this branch to be open otherwise, I will propose an EOL patch for this branch. Thanks & Regards, Vishal Manchanda [1] https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-horizon/%23openstack-hori… [2] https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack%252Fhorizon+branch:stable%25…

1 0

Question About BGP Dynamic Routing, Floating IP, and SNAT
by Alex 31 May '23

31 May '23

Hi Everyone, Hope you are all doing well. I'm a beginner to Openstack and Neutron and now run into an issue about SNAT and shared floating IP. I've already deployed a neutron network which use BGP to announce floating IP to PE (Provider Edge router), and everything works as expected when I assigned the public floating IP (e.g., 123.0.0.10/24) to VMs. But when I tried to use floating IP port-forwarding function with floating IP 123.0.0.20/24 and rule (internal_ip 10.10.10.10, internal_port 5555, external_port 64000), and assign a private IP (10.10.10.10/24) to a VM. The floating IP 123.0.0.20 won't be advertised through BGP. May I have some suggestions about how could I get this fixed, or the neutron just won't work this way? FYI, 1. Per my understanding, the port_forwardings rule will make the port acts like a SNAT role and forward any packets that reached to it with destination 123.0.0.20:64000 to the private IP 10.10.10.10/24. 2. The IP address could be reached in the neutron network. 3. PE IP address, CE IP address, and floating IP gateway are using the same subnet A and subnet pool (192.168.123.0/24), while floating IP belongs to subnet B and subnet pool (123.0.0.0/24), both subnets belong to provider network. 4. Only floating IP that assigned to the specific VM will be advertised to PE through BGP 5. Floating IP that assigned to port of a router in the neutron network won't be advertised, even the IP is activated and is reachable internally. Sincerely, Alex

1 0

[ironic] retirement of old bugfix branches
by Riccardo Pittau 31 May '23

31 May '23

Hello everyone! We're going to remove old bugfix branches in the next few weeks, all bugfix branches that are older than 6 months are officially EoL. This includes: - for ironic bugfix/18.0 bugfix/18.1 bugfix/19.0 bugfix/20.2 bugfix/21.0 bugfix/21.2 - for ironic-inspector bugfix/10.7 bugfix/10.9 bugfix/10.12 bugfix/11.0 bugfix/11.2 -for ironic-python-agent bugfix/8.0 bugfix/8.1 bugfix/8.3 bugfix/8.6 bugfix/9.0 bugfix/9.2 Thanks! Ciao Riccardo

1 0

openstack backup volume - error with rootwrap
by garcetto 31 May '23

31 May '23

goodmorning, using kolla-openstack zed cluster, cinder backend is nfs, cinder-backup is another nfs too. when i try to do backup: #openstack volume backup create 43e97a6d-c965-4127-8334-df5b5e8e8a05 (on cinder-backup container) (/var/log/cinder-backup.log) " ERROR oslo_messaging.rpc.server Command: sudo cinder-rootwrap /etc/cinder/rootwrap.conf chown 42407 /var/lib/cinder/mnt/6c827b655049ba4f069fd5f103620555/volume-20f3c72c-0b57-4500-b552-5056d12fd9c7 2023-05-31 12:37:37.551 7 ERROR oslo_messaging.rpc.server Exit code: 1 2023-05-31 12:37:37.551 7 ERROR oslo_messaging.rpc.server Stdout: '' 2023-05-31 12:37:37.551 7 ERROR oslo_messaging.rpc.server Stderr: "/bin/chown: changing ownership of '/var/lib/cinder/mnt/6c827b655049ba4f069fd5f103620555/volume-20f3c72c-0b57-4500-b552-5056d12fd9c7': Invalid argument\n" 2023-05-31 12:37:37.551 7 ERROR oslo_messaging.rpc.server " could anyone give me advice how to proceed? thank you for your time.

3 3

[kolla-ansible][zed] nfs as backend for nova
by garcetto 31 May '23

31 May '23

good afternoon, it is a clear doc or tutorial on how to configure an nfs share as backend storage for nova root vm volumes? (find for ceph but not for nfs) thank you

1 0

Affinity Group in Open Stack
by Adivya Singh 31 May '23

31 May '23

Hi Guys, Anything i can check on this , more from the server logs and the switch logs Packet drops when using trex traffic generator when device under test and traffic generator are not in same compute node But if we launch the instance using affinity and traffic generator and client on the same node , it works fine Regards Adivya Singh

1 0

[openstack-helm] Storyboard cleanup
by Vladimir Kozhukalov 31 May '23

31 May '23

Dear Openstack-helmers, Minor announcement about OSH Storyboard. During May/2023 I have been putting some effort into cleaning up the Storyboard. More than 50 stories have been reviewed, verified and updated as merged or invalid. Now we still have 44 active stories in the OSH project group and I am going to clean them up even more. Also the infra team helped us to unlink 3 retired OSH projects from the OSH Storyboard project group. So now only active projects openstack-helm, openstack-helm-infra and openstack-helm-images are in the project group. -- Best regards, Kozhukalov Vladimir

1 0

Cinder Bug Report 2023-05-31
by Sofia Enriquez 31 May '23

31 May '23

Hello Argonauts, Cinder Bug Meeting Etherpad <https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-bug-squad-meeting> *Medium* - Creating a snapshot failed by schema validation when its description contains a new line control character <https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/2021909>. - *Status:* Unassigned. I'm kind of lost on this one if any Argonaut would like to give it a look. - Cached images duplicated per host. <https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/2020733> - *Status:* Unassigned. - HPE 3par: Unable to create clones of replicated vol. <https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/2021941> - *Status*: Fix proposed to master. <https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/884594> - NetApp ONTAP enhanced instance creation using file copy API should allow use of DNS name for NFS share <https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/2021741>. - *Status*: Unassigned. Is this related to https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/2020733? - NetApp ONTAP driver does not include snapshot-<uuid> files for capacity calculations of provisioned_capacity_gb <https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/2021746>. - *Status*: Unassigned. - *Low* - Using NetApp ONTAP file copy for copy offload needs volume provider_location set. <https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/2021739> - *Status:* Unassigned. Cheers -- Sofía Enriquez she/her Software Engineer Red Hat PnT <https://www.redhat.com> IRC: @enriquetaso @RedHat <https://twitter.com/redhat> Red Hat <https://www.linkedin.com/company/red-hat> Red Hat <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc> <https://www.redhat.com>

1 0

[cinder] Midcycle-1 Status (31st May)
by Rajat Dhasmana 31 May '23

31 May '23

Hello Argonauts, As you know we had planned our first midcycle of 2023.2 Bobcat cycle on 31st May, 2023. I created an etherpad[1] around a month ago and have been providing constant reminders in every cinder meeting about adding topics. At this point, no topic has been added which makes me believe that we don't require a midcycle discussion. I will wait till today EOD to see if any new topics are added, and if not, we will continue with our usual video+IRC (end of the month) meeting[2]. [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-bobcat-midcycles [2] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-bobcat-meetings Thanks Rajat Dhasmana

1 1

[Cinder][LVM backend] LVM vg backed by a shared LUN
by wodel youchi 31 May '23

31 May '23

Hi, The examples I could find on the internet using LVM as backend for Cinder, they expose a local disk using lvm via Cinder. I did this configuration and I am wondering if it's correct, especially from a "simultaneous access" point of view. I have an iSCSI target backed by targetcli that exposes a LUN to my compute nodes. I did configure the iscsi connexion manually on each one of them and they all see the LUN, then on one of them I created the cinder-volumes VG (the other nodes can see the modifications), then I configured Cinder with lvm backend using this VG and it worked. I created some volumes on it without issues using my account. But what about when there are multiple tenants that try to create multiple volumes on it, is this configuration safe? Regards.

3 2