- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[all][tc] What's happening in Technical Committee: summary 03 June 2022: Reading: 5 min
by Ghanshyam Mann 04 Jun '22

04 Jun '22

Hello Everyone, Here is this week's summary of the Technical Committee activities. 1. TC Meetings: ============ * We had this week's meeting on 02 June. Most of the topics I am summarizing in this email. This was a video call and recordings are available @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHG2WJNceMs And logs summary are available @https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2022/tc.2022-06-02-15.02.log.html * We are cancelling next week's meeting. The next TC weekly meeting will be on 16 June Thursday at 15:00 UTC, feel free to add the topic to the agenda[1] by 15 June. 2. What we completed this week: ========================= * TC resolution[2] and documentation[3] for OpenStack release identification schema. This clarify what place we need to use the release number and name. * Security SIG chair rotation from Gage to Jeremy[4] * Removed security-analysis repo from Security SIG[5] * Added a repository for the Large Scale SIG[6] * Added project stats check tool[7] 3. Activities In progress: ================== TC Tracker for Zed cycle ------------------------------ * Zed tracker etherpad includes the TC working items[8], many items are in-progress. Open Reviews ----------------- * Four open reviews for ongoing activities[9]. New release cadence "SLURP" open items -------------------------------------------------- 1. release notes strategy: Brian proposal for ""SLURP release notes approach is up for review[10]. Improve project governance --------------------------------- Slawek has the proposal the framework up and it is under review[11]. New ELK service dashboard: e-r service ----------------------------------------------- dpawlik working on ansible playbooks to deploy e-r and functional tests. TripleO team and dpawlik are working on the e-r repo merge. Consistent and Secure Default RBAC ------------------------------------------- We had a call yesterday and discussed about presenting this to the ops meetup in berlin and getting feedback, especially on the 'scope' concept. knikolla plan to moderate this topic in the ops meetup but unfortunately he will not be to make it to the summit. I have added a few notes and what questions we need to ask the operator in etherpad[12]. Please note that operator feedback is very important for us to proceed on 'scope' in SRBAC. If you are operator or know anyone around you, we request you to provide feedback. 2021 User Survey TC Question Analysis ----------------------------------------------- No update on this. The survey summary is up for review[13]. Feel free to check and provide feedback. Zed cycle Leaderless projects ---------------------------------- No updates on this. Only Adjutant project is leaderless/maintainer-less. We will check Adjutant's the situation again on ML and hope Braden will be ready with their company side permission[14]. Fixing Zuul config error ---------------------------- Requesting projects with zuul config error to look into those and fix them which should not take much time[15][16]. Project updates ------------------- * Add a repository for the Large Scale SIG[17] 4. How to contact the TC: ==================== If you would like to discuss or give feedback to TC, you can reach out to us in multiple ways: 1. Email: you can send the email with tag [tc] on openstack-discuss ML[18]. 2. Weekly meeting: The Technical Committee conduct a weekly meeting every Thursday 15 UTC [19] 3. Ping us using 'tc-members' nickname on #openstack-tc IRC channel. [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/843214 [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/841800 [4] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance-sigs/+/844446 [5] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/844463 [6] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/843535 [7] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/810037 [8] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-zed-tracker [9] https://review.opendev.org/q/projects:openstack/governance+status:open [10] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/843457 [11] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/839880 [12] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/ops-meetup-berlin-2022-planning#L53 [13] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/836888 [14] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-March/027626.ht… [15] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/zuul-config-error-openstack [16] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-May/028603.html [17] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/843534 [18] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-discuss [19] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Technical_Committee_Meeting -gmann

1 0

[all][tc] Change OpenStack release naming policy proposal
by Slawek Kaplonski 03 Jun '22

03 Jun '22

Hi, During the last PTG in April 2022 in the TC meeting we were discussing our release naming policy [1]. It seems that choosing appropriate name for every releases is very hard and time consuming. There is many factors which needs to be taken into consideration there like legal but also meaning of the chosen name in many different languages. Finally we decided that now, after Zed release, when we will go all round through alphabet it is very good time to change this policy and use only numeric version with "year"."release in the year". It is proposed in [2]. This is also good timing for such change because in the same release we are going to start our "Tick Tock" release cadence which means that every Tick release will be release with .1 (like 2023.1, 2024.1, etc.) and every Tock release will be one with .2 (2023.2, 2024.2, etc.). [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-zed-ptg#L265[1] [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/839897[2] -- Slawek Kaplonski Principal Software Engineer Red Hat -------- [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-zed-ptg#L265 [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/839897

16 42

Fwd: [Forum] Meet the Projects Session!
by Kendall Nelson 03 Jun '22

03 Jun '22

Hello :) I wanted to take a moment to invite project maintainers, core contributors, PTLs, governance officials, etc to a meet the projects (projects being the OIF top level ones- Kata, Zuul, OpenStack, StarlingX, and Airship) session during the Forum at the upcoming Summit in Berlin. It will take place Tue, June 7, 11:20am - 12:30pm local in A - A06. The idea is to gather in a single place so that newer members of the community or people unfamiliar with the project can come and meet some of the active participants and ask questions. It's all really informal so there is no need to prepare anything ahead of time. I realize it is pretty late in everyone's planning their schedules for the summit, but if you have a few minutes to spare to come hang out and meet some people and network, please do! We would love to see you there. -Kendall

5 4

[sdk] openstacksdk 0.99.0 breaks swift object header setting
by Clark Boylan 03 Jun '22

03 Jun '22

Hello, Last week the OpenDev team upgraded Zuul which deployed zuul-executors with openstacksdk==0.99.0 installed. After this, test job logs uploaded to the rackspace swift location were no longer viewable in the Zuul dashboard. The reason for this is these objects did not have properly configured CORS headers any longer. The objects uploaded to OVH appear to have been fine (potentially because the headers are not required for OVH). Today we downgraded the version of openstacksdk on the zuul-executors to 0.61.0 and the rackspace uploaded job log objects have functional CORS headers again. For this reason we're fairly confident that something about the 0.99.0 release is impacting the setting of these headers. The code that does these uploads with openstacksdk can be found here [0]. I suspect that the problem is going to be related to this header set on line 227 [1]. In particular that appears to be rackspace specific and this issue is rackspace specific under 0.99.0. However, I wasn't able to find anything in openstacksdk that would have a problem with this. Does anyone else have ideas? I'm somewhat concerned that this represents a class of data loss (metadata is going missing) for swift object uploads. Additionally, we rely on setting the x-delete-after header to timeout, expire, and prune our logs in swift [2]. If there is a general problem with 0.99.0 setting headers on objects it is possible that all of the objects we created using 0.99.0 do not have this metadata set and will leak in their swift containers. [0] https://opendev.org/zuul/zuul-jobs/src/commit/e69d879caecb454c529a7d757b80a… [1] https://opendev.org/zuul/zuul-jobs/src/commit/e69d879caecb454c529a7d757b80a… [2] https://opendev.org/zuul/zuul-jobs/src/commit/e69d879caecb454c529a7d757b80a…

3 7

[ironic] No weekly meeting next week (June 6)
by Iury Gregory 02 Jun '22

02 Jun '22

Hello ironicers, As you probably already know, next week is the Open Infrastructure Summit in Berlin and some of us will be at the event. We will resume our weekly meeting on June 13. Thanks! -- *Att[]'sIury Gregory Melo Ferreira * *MSc in Computer Science at UFCG* *Ironic PTL* *Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat Brazil* *Social*: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iurygregory *E-mail: iurygregory(a)gmail.com <iurygregory(a)gmail.com>*

1 0

[release] Release countdown for week R-17, Jun 06 - 10
by Előd Illés 02 Jun '22

02 Jun '22

Development Focus ----------------- The Zed-2 milestone will happen in next month, on July 14th, 2022. Zed-related specs should now be finalized so that teams can move to implementation ASAP. Some teams observe specific deadlines on the second milestone (mostly spec freezes): please refer to https://releases.openstack.org/ <https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html>zed <https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html>/schedule.html <https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html>for details. General Information ------------------- Please remember that libraries need to be released at least once per milestone period. At milestone 2, the release team will propose releases for any library that has not been otherwise released since milestone 1. Other non-library deliverables that follow the cycle-with-intermediary release model should have an intermediary release before milestone-2. Those who haven't will be proposed to switch to the cycle-with-rc model, which is more suited to deliverables that are released only once per cycle. At milestone-2 we also freeze the contents of the final release. If you have a new deliverable that should be included in the final release, you should make sure it has a deliverable file in: https://opendev.org/openstack/releases/src/branch/master/deliverables/ <https://opendev.org/openstack/releases/src/branch/master/deliverables/zed>zed <https://opendev.org/openstack/releases/src/branch/master/deliverables/zed> You should request a beta release (or intermediary release) for those new deliverables by milestone-2. We understand some may not be quite ready for a full release yet, but if you have something minimally viable to get released it would be good to do a 0.x release to exercise the release tooling for your deliverables. See the MembershipFreeze description for more details: https://releases.openstack.org/ <https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html#z-mf>zed <https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html#z-mf>/schedule.html# <https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html#z-mf>z <https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html#z-mf>-mf <https://releases.openstack.org/zed/schedule.html#z-mf> Finally, now may be a good time for teams to check on any stable releases that need to be done for your deliverables. If you have bugfixes that have been backported, but no stable release getting those. If you are unsure what is out there committed but not released, in the openstack/releases repo, running the command "tools/list_stable_unreleased_changes.sh <cycle_name>" gives a nice report. Upcoming Deadlines & Dates -------------------------- Zed-2 Milestone: July 14th, 2022 OpenInfra Summit: June 7-9, 2022 (Berlin) Előd Illés irc: elodilles

1 0

[dev][docs][security-sig] Retiring security-analysis process and repo
by Jeremy Stanley 02 Jun '22

02 Jun '22

In 2016, what was then the Security Project Team embarked on an effort to centrally collect security analyses of OpenStack components. It accumulated a total of two, one for Barbican as of the Newton release, and another for KeystoneMiddleware as of Pike. The latter was finalized in 2017 and took nearly a year to merge due to already waning enthusiasm and reviewer availability: https://docs.openstack.org/security-analysis Given this effort was effectively abandoned years ago, the Security SIG members agree that the repository should be retired in order to reduce confusion. The vulnerability management oversight requirements were amended in February to remove any reference to this process, and we reached a consensus that this sort of documentation is better off inside the projects which are writing it rather than collected centrally with a disconnected (or in this case absent) group of reviewers and maintainers. This message serves as notice to the community that we will be pushing changes to follow the usual OpenStack repository retirement process for openstack/security-analysis in the coming days. As usual, the final state of the documents will be found in the parent commit of the one which wipes all the old files, but for posterity I'll link it here as well: https://opendev.org/openstack/security-analysis/src/commit/ac43025 Many thanks to those who attempted to provide and review these analyses in years past. The idea of maintaining information on the security risks and considerations for the systems we design is still a good one, and something I hope our contributor community might find more time to focus on in the years to come; but the place to document those things is right alongside the rest of the software's documentation, there's nothing inherently special or different about it. -- Jeremy Stanley

1 0

[all][tc] Technical Committee next weekly meeting on June 2, 2022 at 1500 UTC
by Ghanshyam Mann 02 Jun '22

02 Jun '22

Hello Everyone, The technical Committee's next weekly meeting is scheduled for June 2, 2022, at 1500 UTC. If you would like to add topics for discussion, please add them to the below wiki page by Wednesday, June 1, at 2100 UTC. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting -gmann

1 1

Resources to learn IT Infrastructure
by Raghav Gururajan 02 Jun '22

02 Jun '22

Hello All, I am stepping into infrastructure side of the IT world and was wondering if any of you could recommend best books, materials or videos for learning? Regards, Raghav "RG" Gururajan.

1 0

Re: Re: [vdi][daas][ops] What are your solutions to VDI/DaaS on OpenStack?
by Ümit Seren 02 Jun '22

02 Jun '22

We are using xpra (https://xpra.org/) together with VirtualGL (https://www.virtualgl.org/) on our virtualized OpenStack based SLURM cluster to support OpenGL accelerated applications such as MorphoGraphX (https://morphographx.org/) for our users. This works pretty well. There was a bit of work involved because it requires an X11 server to run on the compute nodes but once this was done it worked fairly well. Best Ümit On 02.06.22, 01:10, "Andy Botting" <andy(a)andybotting.com> wrote: Hi Radosław, > I am wondering if and how OpenStackers are approaching the subject of > VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure), also nowadays commonly called > DaaS (Desktop as a Service) offering. > To be more specific, I am looking forward to a solution covering both > Linux and Windows desktops, pre-OS screen access optional, > well-integrated (i.e., having automation) with OpenStack Nova, > preferably also with Cinder and Glance, optionally with Keystone > (apart from self-auth of course!) and Heat, 3D acceleration optional > (most of the desktops here don't need it), nice to have read-only > sharing of screen. We just launched a service like this on the Nectar Research Cloud. Like you, I looked around but couldn't find any Open Source projects that would be suitable. In the end, we based ours on a project from the University of Melbourne that did initially support Windows, but we removed some of that support to simplify our codebase as we didn't need it. We called it Bumblebee, and the code is here: https://github.com/NeCTAR-RC/bumblebee It's a Django web app with a Redis-based task scheduler that launches Nova instances, booted from a Cinder volume, cloned from a base OS image. The Django app directly modifies Guacamole's database to create the connections once the OpenStack resources have been provisioned and provides the user with a link that takes them to their desktop. We used Keycloak with OIDC for authentication on the web app and Guacamole and it's fairly seamless transitioning between the two. We did initially look at using Heat, but we wanted to support a workflow of being able to destroy the VM and archive the OS image to Swift (and restore again later if needed) so it was easier to just manage the resources directly. There's no 3D acceleration in our solution yet, but we're planning on looking at things like virtual GPUs later on. Sadly, I'm not going to make it to Berlin either, but I was thinking it might make for a good talk at the next summit. I'm in the process of properly documenting it now, so I don't have much to share at this point, but I'm happy to go into more detail about anything. cheers, Andy

1 0