- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[ci][kolla] setuptools v82.0.0 breaks a bunch of things by removing pkg_resources
by Michael Still 11 Feb '26

11 Feb '26

Hey all, I've just noticed that setuptools v82.0.0 released todayish and breaks a bunch of Kolla builds (and probably other things) by removing pkg_resources. https://setuptools.pypa.io/en/stable/history.html#v82-0-0 has further details of the release. setuptools doesn't seem to be listed in upper-constraints, perhaps because it's often provided as a distro package? Michael

9 16

How to access OpenStack instances from the bastion node when deploying OpenStack using Kolla-Ansible
by ussefelboukhari＠gmail.com 11 Feb '26

11 Feb '26

In test environments, some users choose to build their infrastructure inside KVM virtual machines, while others use cloud instances such as EC2 bare-metal that support nested virtualization. After deploying OpenStack, many of them face a major issue: they are unable to access their OpenStack instances. I encountered the same problem myself. After several weeks of intensive troubleshooting, I eventually found a solution. That is why I would like to share this solution with others who face the same issue, and hopefully contribute to the OpenStack community by providing recommendations that could be added to the official OpenStack documentation.

2 1

[nova][elections][ptl] Application for the PTL role 2026.2
by René Ribaud 11 Feb '26

11 Feb '26

Hello, After serving as PTL for Flamingo and Gazpacho, I would like to announce my candidacy for the 2026.2 (Hibiscus) Nova and Placement PTL role. The previous cycle was somewhat unusual, as upstream contributions from several core contributors were impacted by internal changes within their organizations. Despite this, the community stayed engaged and resilient, and I am grateful for everyone who kept things moving forward. The Eventlet removal effort, which started earlier and significantly progressed during Flamingo and Gazpacho, should reach completion this cycle. This will be an important milestone and will allow us to introduce new changes more confidently. In 2026.2, I would like to focus on enabling forward-looking work such as confidential computing improvements, restarting collaboration with Manila around virtiofs, and further I/O performance improvements. The concrete priorities and scope of these efforts will be discussed and refined during the next PTG. In parallel, I will continue to improve review efficiency and maintain a welcoming and focused community. My goal remains simple: keep Nova and Placement robust, maintainable, and aligned with our users’ needs. I would be honored to continue serving in this role. Thanks, René

1 0

[kolla-ansible][rabbitmq] RabbitMQ cluster creation took too long
by Nguyễn Hữu Khôi 10 Feb '26

10 Feb '26

Hello. I am deploying OpenStack 2025.1 with Kolla-Ansible 2025.1 (master branch) using the latest images. However, when I created a RabbitMQ(4.0.x) cluster with 3 nodes, it took too long—around 12 minutes(it stucked at DB: virgin node -> run peer discovery). I then changed the images to RabbitMQ version 3.13.7, and it worked well. My OS: Ubuntu 24.01 Nguyen Huu Khoi

2 2

[ops][publiccloud-sig] Public Cloud SIG meeting d.d. 11 February
by Kees Meijs | Nefos 10 Feb '26

10 Feb '26

Hello Stackers, Tomorrow (that's 11 February) the bi-weekly Public Cloud SIG meeting will be held again. The publicly available video meeting will be conducted from 08:05 hrs UTC (09:05 hrs CET) until 08:55 hrs UTC (09:55 hrs CET) here: https://meetpad.opendev.org/publiccloud-sig Additional information to be found on https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PublicCloudSIG See you tomorrow! Cheers, Kees __ Kees Meijs BICT Nefos Cloud & IT <https://nefos.com/contact> Nefos IT bv Burgemeester Mollaan 34a 5582 CK Waalre - NL kvk 66494931 +31 (0)88 2088 188 <tel:+31882088188> nefos.com <https://nefos.com/contact> The information contained in this message is intended for the addressee only and may contain classified information. If you are not the addressee, please delete this message and notify the sender; you should not copy or distribute this message or disclose its contents to anyone. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual(s) and not necessarily of the organization. No reliance may be placed on this message without written confirmation from an authorised representative of its contents. No guarantee is implied that this message or any attachment is virus free or has not been intercepted and amended. General terms and conditions ("The NLdigital Terms") apply to all our products and services.

1 0

How to change flavor or sg of a virtual machine with Ansible?
by Marco Favero 10 Feb '26

10 Feb '26

Hello, I'm new in this Openstack world and I love Ansible. I'm trying to use the openstack.cloud Ansible collection to manage virtual machines. There is no problems in adding or deleting a virtual machine (vm). The openstack.cloud.server module works very well. I'm in trouble if I want to update a vm. The server module has only the "present" state: the resource is not updated after the creation if I change something in the module parameters. So, I can't use openstack.cloud.server module in order to change the flavor or security group of an already existing vm. The "server_action" module is not useful because it has not update actions about sg or flavor. I tried the CRUD "resource" module in some way such as --- - name: Change resources hosts: localhost tasks: - name: Change flavor to vm openstack.cloud.resource: cloud: myStack service: compute type: server attributes: name: vm-name flavor_id: 22b4d2c2-0fff-437b-a67c-009244f89403 state: present wait: true but the play fails with fatal: [localhost]: FAILED! => {"changed": false, "extra_data": {"data": null, "details": "Invalid input for field/attribute server. Value: {'flavorRef': '22b4d2c2-0fd8-437b-a67c-009244f89403'}. Additional properties are not allowed ('flavorRef' was unexpected)" If I try with "flavor" or "security_groups" attributes in place of "flavor_id" the error doesn't change. Could you help me? My env is: [root@cnt-ansible]/workdir/openstack# ansible-galaxy collection list | grep openstack openstack.cloud 2.5.0 [root@cnt-ansible]/workdir/openstack# pip3 list | grep openstack openstacksdk 4.9.0 ansible [core 2.16.14] Thank you very much Kind Regards Marco

5 5

[neutron] Bug Deputy Report Feb 02 - Feb 09
by Terry Wilson 09 Feb '26

09 Feb '26

Hi Neutrinos, Below is the bug deputy report for last week: High ==== * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2141304 - [oslo master] neutron-periodic-workers crashing with ERROR neutron AttributeError: Can't pickle local object 'Mapper.__init__.<locals>.<lambda>' - Unassigned Medium ====== * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2139583 - neutron-openvswitch-agent native driver: Permanent flow loss after OVS restart due to unhandled 'unknown dpid' during rpc_loop - Unassigned - As Yatin mentioned last week, it looks valid. Reporter attached the requested logs and points to the code they think is responsible. * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2139581 - Updating router state fails due to NoneType error - Assigned to William Tripp - Patch uploaded by Rodolfo - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/975373 * https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/975373 - TapMirrorPlugin should not allow execution of non implemented TaasPlugin methods - Assigned to Miro Tomaska * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2140291 - [network_segment_range] VM creation fails with a KeyError - Assigned to Kyuyeong Lee * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2141308 - ``LoggingServiceDriverManager`` should handle the update of ``rpc_required`` - Assigned to Rodolfo - Patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/976130 Low === * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2140762 - Define a reasonable default value for the OVN FDB aging and removal limit - Assigned to Rodolfo, - Patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/975908 * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2141320 - [neutron-fwaas] The FWaaS plugin is always loading the ``IptablesLoggingDriver`` - Unassigned

1 0

[tc][all] OpenStack Technical Committee Weekly Summary and Meeting Agenda (2026.1/R-7)
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 09 Feb '26

09 Feb '26

Hello Stackers, We're 7 weeks away from the date of the coordinated release of OpenStack 2026.1 "Gazpacho" [1]. At the end of this week, Oslo libraries and python-openstackclient will observe a feature-freeze until we are past the coordinated release. Project teams are busy reviewing feature changes in "cycle-with-rc" deliverables [2] with the hope to observe feature freeze in two weeks (February 26, 2026). In the past week, the OpenStack Technical Committee reset the leadership model for the Oslo and Requirements project teams. This means that these project teams could nominate and elect a PTL during the ongoing elections [3]. We do this with cautious optimism to indicate to the wider community that project governance is hard and it's extremely valuable. Oslo and Requirements are two project teams that maintain deliverables that affect nearly every other OpenStack project. However, we've only at best received part-time interest in their maintenance. Project liaisons have told the TC that they would really like help in the form of newer maintainers. If you're thinking about joining these project teams and lending a hand, please let us know. In a similar vein, over the past several weeks, the TC has noted that the FIPS compliance goal has degraded in its purpose [4]. In the past few release cycles, more work has been put into maintaining test jobs and this has threatened to divert our limited resources. The effort to pull together testing across OpenStack projects has turned out to be too large for an individual to handle. Therefore, we've dropped the cross-community goal for the moment. For it to be revived, we would need a level of commitment from a team of individuals, a clear definition of what can be tested, how the tests will function, and who would maintain them. We understand that FIPS compliance can be essential for a subset of organizations or countries that OpenStack serves. The TC doesn't seek to push back on the goal, but we need specifics and resources that we can't dedicate at the moment. As a consequence, project teams can choose to tear down existing jobs, or choose to maintain them using their best judgment. Finally, the elections are underway. We are seeking nominations for 5 seats on the OpenStack Technical Committee and for PTLs across project teams, with the exception of the Freezer, Ironic, and Release Management teams that have decided to follow a Distributed Leadership Model for the 2026.2 release cycle. If you wish to nominate yourself, please note that the nominations need to be accepted by 23:45 UTC on February 18, 2026 [3]. I hope you are able to verify your eligibility to be a part of the electorate as well [5]. === Weekly Meeting === The OpenStack Technical Committee meeting on February 3, 2026 focused on our feedback loop on project health as we approach the Gazpacho Feature Freeze [6]. We discussed the OpenStack User Survey with Allison Price (aprice), VP of Marketing & Community at the OpenInfra Foundation. We've concluded that the survey’s current complexity has become a barrier for operators; our goal is to rebuild it from a clean slate. A thought was to move to an opt-in model for questions with which we can deliver a leaner, more impactful survey by August 2026. We hope that the survey will provide PTLs with actionable data rather than just historical noise. I encourage all project leads/liaisons to participate in the upcoming feedback sessions to ensure the insights you actually need for development are prioritized. [7] On the technical and governance front, we're supporting the revival of Cyborg by resolving Launchpad ownership issues and ensuring the team has the necessary core permissions to land release-critical patches before M-3. We also addressed the reality of declining synchronous meeting attendance in projects like Barbican; while we are comfortable with teams moving to ad-hoc or asynchronous coordination to match their contributor velocity, the TC remains firm that design discussions must stay public and logged. Finally, we discussed the ongoing elections and the difficult and thankless job of maintaining cross-functional project teams like Requirements, Oslo, and Release Management. A hat tip to you folks that volunteer to do this! The next meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee is on Tuesday, February 10, 2026. It will be hosted on the #openstack-tc IRC channel on OFTC. Please find the agenda on the meeting's wiki page [8]. I hope you'll be able to join us there. === Governance Proposals === ==== Merged ==== - Move FIPS Compliance goal back to proposed | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/969145 - Reset the DPL model for Oslo project | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/974929 - Reset the DPL model for requirements project | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/974927 ==== Open For Review ==== - Add a script to abandon changes on retired repositories | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/975594 - Revert "Revive os_monasca" | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/974775 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] Cycle with RC release model: https://releases.openstack.org/reference/release_models.html#cycle-with-rc [3] OpenStack "2026.2" Elections: https://governance.openstack.org/election/ [4] FIPS compliance goal dropped back to "proposed": https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/proposed/fips.html [5] Check your eligibility to vote: https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… [6] https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2026/tc.2026-02-03-17.00.html [7] Streamlining the OpenStack User Survey: https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… [8] TC Meeting Agenda, February 10 2026: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting

1 0

[cyborg] Restarting Weekly Cyborg IRC Meetings
by Ronelle Landy 09 Feb '26

09 Feb '26

Hello All, We would like to restart the weekly Cyborg IRC meetings on the #openstack-cyborg channel. Meetings were previously held on Fridays at 0600UTC - 0700UTC. Previous meetings notes can be found at [1]. Noting the graphical distribution of the initial engineers who wish to start contributing, there is a proposal to move the meetings to Tuesdays 14:00 -15:00 UTC. If there are no objections, the IRC meetings will start on Tuesday, February 17th at 14:00 UTC. Please join the discussions on channel and the meetings if you wish to contribute. Thank you, Ronelle [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/CyborgTeamMeeting#Agenda

1 1

[Nova] Live migration failed / VM has latency with patch to add managed='no' flag to libvirt XML
by Chang Xue 09 Feb '26

09 Feb '26

Hi, We are upgrading from Jammy to Noble, and need to include the patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/967570?tab=comments so VMs could be created on Noble nodes. However, all of our existing VMs that were created without the patch could not be live migrated to Noble, and has latency in live migrating to Jammy WITH the patch. To be clear: Old VMs created on Jammy -> patch applied on Jammy and Noble -> VMs can be live migrated to Jammy now, but with latency (VMs are pingable almost 10 seconds after live migration completed); VMs can not be live migrated directly to Noble nodes. After live migrated to Jammy with latency, we could live migrate the VMs between Jammy nodes, and one-way to Noble nodes, without any latency. Would like to understand it more, is there any way to get rid of the latency issue? I tried to patch nova/virt/libvirt/migration.py to add managed='no' flag when migration is on fly, but it only allows me to live migrate the old VMs directly to Noble nodes, latency still exists. Thanks, Chang

4 11