- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[OpenStack Ansible] [Deployment] Depolyment errors
by holywine＠outlook.com 16 Dec '25

16 Dec '25

Hello, Trying to deploy OpenStack on 5 hosts (3 infra, 2 compute). During executing command "openstack-ansible openstack.osa.setup_infrastructure" following errors occurred. Can anybody please provide a clue on what went wrong? Thanks in advance! 2025-12-16 16:21:15,379 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| container_name: "infra1-repo-container-0b24c04d" 2025-12-16 16:21:15,379 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| physical_host: "infra1" 2025-12-16 16:21:15,379 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| Container confirmed 2025-12-16 16:21:15,533 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| Using module file /etc/ansible/ansible_collections/gluster/gluster/plugins/modules/gluster_peer.py 2025-12-16 16:21:15,533 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| Pipelining is enabled. 2025-12-16 16:21:15,533 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| <infra1> ESTABLISH SSH CONNECTION FOR USER: root 2025-12-16 16:21:15,534 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| <infra1> SSH: EXEC ssh -vvv -C -o ControlMaster=auto -o ControlPersist=300 -o StrictHostKeyChecking=no -o KbdInteractiveAuthentication=no -o PreferredAuthentications=gssapi-with-mic,gssapi-keyex,hostbased,publickey -o PasswordAuthentication=no -o 'User="root"' -o ConnectTimeout=5 -o UserKnownHostsFile=/dev/null -o StrictHostKeyChecking=no -o ServerAliveInterval=64 -o ServerAliveCountMax=1024 -o Compression=no -o TCPKeepAlive=yes -o VerifyHostKeyDNS=no -o ForwardX11=no -o ForwardAgent=yes -T -o 'ControlPath="/root/.ansible/cp/0fbb4d5943"' infra1 'sudo lxc-attach --clear-env --name infra1-repo-container-0b24c04d -- su - root -c '"'"'/bin/sh -c '"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'/usr/bin/python3.12 && sleep 0'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"''"'"'' 2025-12-16 16:21:19,534 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| <infra1> (1, b'\n{"changed": false, "rc": 1, "failed": true, "msg": "peer probe: failed: Probe returned with Transport endpoint is not connected\\n", "invocation": {"module_args": {"nodes": ["infra1-repo-container-0b24c04d", "infra2-repo-container-8419857e", "infra3-repo-container-8432350f"], "state": "present", "force": null}}}\n', b"OpenSSH_9.6p1 Ubuntu-3ubuntu13.14, OpenSSL 3.0.13 30 Jan 2024\r\ndebug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config\r\ndebug1: /etc/ssh/ssh_config line 19: include /etc/ssh/ssh_config.d/*.conf matched no files\r\ndebug1: /etc/ssh/ssh_config line 21: Applying options for *\r\ndebug1: auto-mux: Trying existing master at '/root/.ansible/cp/0fbb4d5943'\r\ndebug2: fd 3 setting O_NONBLOCK\r\ndebug2: mux_client_hello_exchange: master version 4\r\ndebug3: mux_client_forwards: request forwardings: 0 local, 0 remote\r\ndebug3: mux_client_request_session: entering\r\ndebug3: mux_client_request_alive: entering\r\ndebug3: mux_client_request_alive: done pid = 386307\r\ndebug3: mux_client_request_session: session request sent\r\ndebug1: mux_client_request_session: master session id: 2\r\n/tmp/ansible_gluster.gluster.gluster_peer_payload_cd62ayz2/ansible_gluster.gluster.gluster_peer_payload.zip/ansible_collections/gluster/gluster/plugins/modules/gluster_peer.py:173: DeprecationWarning: distutils Version classes are deprecated. Use packaging.version instead.\ndebug3: mux_client_read_packet_timeout: read header failed: Broken pipe\r\ndebug2: Received exit status from master 1\r\n") 2025-12-16 16:21:19,534 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| <infra1> Failed to connect to the host via ssh: OpenSSH_9.6p1 Ubuntu-3ubuntu13.14, OpenSSL 3.0.13 30 Jan 2024 debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config debug1: /etc/ssh/ssh_config line 19: include /etc/ssh/ssh_config.d/*.conf matched no files debug1: /etc/ssh/ssh_config line 21: Applying options for * debug1: auto-mux: Trying existing master at '/root/.ansible/cp/0fbb4d5943' debug2: fd 3 setting O_NONBLOCK debug2: mux_client_hello_exchange: master version 4 debug3: mux_client_forwards: request forwardings: 0 local, 0 remote debug3: mux_client_request_session: entering debug3: mux_client_request_alive: entering debug3: mux_client_request_alive: done pid = 386307 debug3: mux_client_request_session: session request sent debug1: mux_client_request_session: master session id: 2 /tmp/ansible_gluster.gluster.gluster_peer_payload_cd62ayz2/ansible_gluster.gluster.gluster_peer_payload.zip/ansible_collections/gluster/gluster/plugins/modules/gluster_peer.py:173: DeprecationWarning: distutils Version classes are deprecated. Use packaging.version instead. debug3: mux_client_read_packet_timeout: read header failed: Broken pipe debug2: Received exit status from master 1 2025-12-16 16:21:19,539 p=382940 u=root n=ansible INFO| fatal: [infra1-repo-container-0b24c04d]: FAILED! => changed: false invocation: module_args: force: null nodes: - infra1-repo-container-0b24c04d - infra2-repo-container-8419857e - infra3-repo-container-8432350f state: present msg: |- peer probe: failed: Probe returned with Transport endpoint is not connected rc: 1 BR, Frank

1 0

[blazar] Extending the payload of a notification, to send the entire lease data
by NITIN GUPTA 16 Dec '25

16 Dec '25

Hello Blazar Team, May I have the following change reviewed, for extending the payload of a notification, to send the entire lease data: *https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/blazar/+/965448 <https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/blazar/+/965448>* Looking for your feedback as soon as possible. Best regards. -- NITIN GUPTA

2 9

[neutron] Bug deputy report for week of December 8th
by Brian Haley 16 Dec '25

16 Dec '25

Hi, I was the Neutron bug deputy last week. Below is a short summary about the reported bugs. -Brian Critical bugs ------------- * None High bugs --------- * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2134504 - Wrong neutron:host_id in LSP external_ids after live migration - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/970564 Medium ------ * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2134387 - The is_default flag cannot be modified for external networks - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/970204 * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2134703 - [OVN] `update_lrouter_ports_ext_ids_name_prefix` should provide the Neutron DB port in `_gen_router_port_ext_ids` call - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/970644 Low --- * None Invalid ------- * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2134388 - auto allocate topology fails when there is only a single external network - Could no longer reproduce Wishlist -------- * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2134606 - [RFE] Add an API that returns a list of available IPs in a network - Asked for more information based on the change already proposed for network-ip-availabilities additions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/965083 - Not sure this is useful, will ask at meeting * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2135228 - [RFE] Add support for local sink in tap mirror - Asked Miro to add to future Driver's agenda

1 0

[stable][unmaintained] Move old Unmaintained branches to EOL
by Elõd Illés 15 Dec '25

15 Dec '25

Dear OpenStack Community, A bit more than two years ago the Unmaintained state was formalized [1] to signal towards the community that branches beyond the official maintained phase are not officially supported by the project teams themselves, rather by volunteers with interests to keep these branches open for co-operation and bug fix backports. This requires CI maintenance time to time, as CI jobs, infrastructure, packaging and build tools might also change under these legacy unmaintained branches. My employer, Ericsson, chose to support this process for further co- operation on these legacy branches and we stepped up as maintainer for unmaintained branches back till unmaintained/victoria as a starter, as long as it is feasible. Unfortunately, in the past months the point is reached where multiple gate jobs got broken, CI infrastructure elements (old ubuntu versions, old python versions) went to End of Life, too, and keeping meaningful testing [2] functional, is harder and harder on the oldest unmaintained/* branches [3]. Given these circumstances, I'm officially initiating to move old unmaintained branches to End of Life, starting with Victoria, and up till Yoga. I'll prepare the transition patches next week. Thanks to all, who helped with these old branches for this long. Sincerely, Előd Illés irc: elodilles @ #openstack-release / #openstack-stable / #openstack-unmaintained [1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20230724-unmaintained-branc… [2] there were arguments about making it possible to merge patches without tempest or even without any tests, but that is something that we should avoid in my opinion as we cannot be sure that we don't introduce regressions if there were no proper testing and no one would want to consume untested code. [3] ubuntu-bionic node type is removed, py36 based jobs disappeared, tempest jobs started to fail with some test cases and with that, grenade jobs as well, etc.

2 3

[kolla] Cancelling weekly meetings on 24th and 31st of December 2025
by Michał Nasiadka 15 Dec '25

15 Dec '25

Hello Cancelling weekly meetings on 24th and 31st of December for obvious reasons The first meeting in 2026 will be on 7th of January Cheers, Michal

1 0

[freezer] Poll for regular IRC meeting time
by Dmitriy Rabotyagov 15 Dec '25

15 Dec '25

Hi everyone! We have decided to re-initiate a regular IRC meeting for the Freezer project to sync on development and let interested parties to step in and be in the loop of project development. In order to select a suitable time for such meeting for everyone currently interested, I have created a poll, you pay find via the link [1] The poll is open until Monday, December 15. If you are interested in the project and want to take part in meetings - feel free to vote on the timing! I have included as many time periods as possible to ensure we can find a suitable one for everyone. Also please ignore specific dates in the poll - we intend to make a meeting on a weekly basis, so only days of the week do matter there. [1] https://beta.framadate.org/polls/365ef8fa4574a9190ec0

2 2

[Keystone][ldap] Keystone bind request to ldap not able to interpret if the user's password is expired.
by Sharath Ck 15 Dec '25

15 Dec '25

Hi, I have configured Keystone with 389ds as backend. 389ds server is configured with password policy and pwdmustchange is set to true. However on first login attempt from keystone to request token for user in 389ds is resulting in successful bind request. Perhaps, 389ds is providing control ID - control: 2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.4 in the response. But keystone is not able to interpret the control ID and provide a token with full access. Is it not possible for keystone to respond token with minimum scope to only change password? Or any response attribute to specify password is expired and needs to be changed? Kindly help with any configuration that may interpret the password expiry of ldap user and can be used in token response. P.S: configuring user_enabled_attribute to check nsAccountLock will not work as ldap user's password would be expired but not locked. user_enabled_attribute = nsAccountLock user_enabled_mask = 0 user_enabled_invert = true user_enabled_default = true Regards, Sharath

2 1

[docs] Rate limiting (?) on docs.openstack.org causing link checks to break
by Florian Haas 15 Dec '25

15 Dec '25

Hello everyone, here's something of a meta-issue that's been bothering me for a while, and I wonder if we can find a solution or a workaround. Our public documentation at docs.cleura.cloud naturally has cross-references to docs.openstack.org. To make sure that our documentation remains current, the CI/CD build for our docs includes an external link checker.[1] That way, if external documentation paths change or go away, we get notified of a build failure, and this enables us to fix or update our docs. Unfortunately, this results in random and intermittent errors like this: Real URL https://docs.openstack.org/keystone/ Check time 2.759 seconds Size 251B Result Error: ConnectionError: ('Connection aborted.', RemoteDisconnected('Remote end closed connection without response')) The Keystone docs URL is just an example; this sort of error happens all across the docs. Of the scores of docs.openstack.org links we check, it's usually just one that breaks, but it's always a different one. Kicking the pipeline and rerunning the same link check often "fixes" things, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes it breaks with a different link. I surmise that this is caused by a rate limit applicable on docs.openstack.org. I would understand why such a rate limit exists, so I am not suggesting to remove it, but right now I'm at my wit's end and I'm close to adding docs.openstack.org to the ignore regex in our linkchecker configuration. But I really don't *want* to do that because I'd quite prefer for our docs to contain good cross-references, and so I'm interested in keeping docs.o.o included in the link liveness check. I'm guessing others have run into this issue. If anyone has solved it in a clever way, I'd be grateful for suggestions. Thanks! Cheers, Florian [1] https://linkchecker.github.io/linkchecker/

2 2

[tc][all] OpenStack Technical Committee Weekly Summary and Meeting Agenda (2026.1/R-15)
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 14 Dec '25

14 Dec '25

Hello Stackers, We're fifteen weeks away from the coordinated release of OpenStack 2026.1 "Gazpacho" [1]. We're almost at the end of the calendar year, and many community members are taking a well-deserved break during this holiday season observed around the world. The OpenStack Technical Committee did not merge any significant changes in the past week. There's been some more progress on the cleanup effort we embarked on concerning the Monasca project and the governance-sigs repository. Ian Y Choi (ianychoi) and Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq) have graciously agreed to continue as OpenStack's election officials. They're assisted by Tony Breeds (tonyb) who will be the TC liaison. They've begun working on the combined PTL and TC elections that will be conducted in February. We'll share more details about this as they are finalized. === Weekly Meeting === The last meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee occurred on December 9th, 2025, over the #openstack-tc IRC channel on OFTC [2]. At the meeting, we resolved pending some governance-website patches and established a plan to update the Technical Vision document [3] through brainstorming on an Etherpad. We also discussed the idea of requesting a deadline extension to propose user survey modifications [4]. The team felt that extending the deadline beyond M-2 will allow for input from project teams. We acknowledged the plan to delete unmaintained branches through Yoga [5], with a consensus leaning toward also dropping Zed. Clarification was sought from the "openstack-unmaintained-core" team regarding the "opt-in" maintenance model for newer branches. We noted that Ceph Tentacle is now being tested with DevStack. Additionally, Michal Nasiadka (mnasiadka) is exploring a fix to get an x86-v3 version of OVS to be installed on AlmaLinux while we pursue a packaging fix with AlmaLinux maintainers. This is a must-have because AlmaLinux provides us a good chance of testing OpenStack with an RPM-based distro across most of our cloud providers that have older hardware. The next meeting of the TC will be on Tuesday, December 16th, 2025, at 0800 UTC. Please note this new APAC-friendly time slot. We're gathering the community's interest in a once-monthly meeting in this time slot. Please participate if you're able to. You can find the meeting's agenda and other details on its wiki page [6]. The TC decided to cancel the meetings previously scheduled for December 23rd, 2025, and December 30th, in observance of the holidays. === 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 === - 2025-12-16: 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 9 2025: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tc/2025/tc.2025-12-09-17.02.html [3] Vision for OpenStack Clouds: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/technical-vision.html [4] OpenStack 2025 User Survey Feedback: https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… [5] Unmaintained branch cleanup: https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… [6] TC Meeting Agenda, Dec 16 2025: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Next_Meeting

1 0

Kolla-ansible Openstack deployment failed in nova-compute task
by ldemarco＠sinthera.com 12 Dec '25

12 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 11 Dec '25

11 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 11 Dec '25

11 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 09 Dec '25

09 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

[Nova] Reminder no upstream meeting this week.
by René Ribaud 08 Dec '25

08 Dec '25

Hello, Just a quick note to remind everyone that there is no meeting scheduled for today. We will resume as usual next week. Best regards, René

1 0

[neutron] Bug deputy report - week of Dec 1st
by Slawek Kaplonski 08 Dec '25

08 Dec '25

Hi, I was bug deputy last week. It was very quiet week with just couple of new bugs opened. Below is summary of those: ### Critical - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2133807 - tap-as-a-service py313 jobs timeout - CI issue with py313 job, assigned to Lajos, fix proposed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tap-as-a-service/+/969567 ### High - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2133487 - ovs_agent main thread raises ValueError on calling os_ken parser without kwargs - **not assigned**, it was also raised on IRC channel, - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2134338 - [OVN] Maintenance LRP prefix adding fails over 'dict' doesn't have 'name' attribute - fix already proposed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/970056 ### Medium None ### Low - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2133796 - [OVN] The OVN agent config option "[agent]extensions" is not present in the default config file - assigned to Rodolfo, ### RFE - https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2134096 - [OVN] Add both direction to tap mirror - this seems to be very small RFE but technically speaking it is not a bug but request for new feature, I'm don't think we need to discuss that during the drivers meeting really, please take a look at it and comment there - if we will see that discussion is needed, we can always add it to the drivers meeting agenda later, -- Slawek Kaplonski Principal Software Engineer Red Hat

1 0

[release] Release countdown for week R-16, Dec 08 - Dec 12
by Elõd Illés 05 Dec '25

05 Dec '25

Development Focus ----------------- The Gazpacho-2 milestone will happen next month, on January 8th, 2026. 2026.1 Gazpacho-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/gazpacho/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/gazpa… 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/gazpacho/schedule.html#g-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 -------------------------- Gazpacho-2 Milestone: January 8th, 2026 Előd Illés irc: elodilles @ #openstack-release

1 0

Re: using postgresql in production
by Artem Goncharov 05 Dec '25

05 Dec '25

> > On Fri, 5 Dec 2025, 03:25 Sa Pham, <saphi070(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> HI Artem, >> >> Could you share why you run Keystone with Postgresql ? >> >> I'm running Keystone with Postgresql as well, because my other >> application is using Postgresql so I don't want to deploy two Database >> servers. >> And it's working well without issue. >> > It is more or less a personal preference after working professionally for >> decades with both databases. Postgres features remind me more other major >> relational databases, while MySQL goes "own way". It's not about certain >> needs of Keystone, this is just a personal preference. >> > > > >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 11:10 PM Artem Goncharov < >> artem.goncharov(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> In my local tests I always use postgres for Keystone (as well in the >>> keystone-ng testing) and it works. But I agree we do not have dedicated >>> tests as of now, so some edge cases may be broken >>> >>> On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 at 16:37, Sean Mooney <smooney(a)redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>>> nova does not have tempet/devstack jobs either >>>> however we never officially deprecated or removed support for PostgreSQL >>>> >>>> we still test it in our unit tests to ensure the schema applies and some >>>> other minor test coverage but its also been a few years since there was >>>> any real >>>> end to end testing. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04/12/2025 14:36, Julia Kreger wrote: >>>> > Greetings, >>>> > >>>> > Ironic ended up removing CI jobs for postgres back in 2024[0] when >>>> > keystone merged postgres incompatible changes which broke the CI job >>>> > and rendered it impossible to test. Previous to that, I think in 2023 >>>> > or 2022, neutron made some changes but quickly fixed the breaking >>>> > changes once they were highlighted. The linked change has some back >>>> > and forth and the mailing list post[1] which spawned job removal from >>>> > Ironic. Ultimately, while people have expressed interest, that has >>>> > never really materialized into action or engagement to keep postgres >>>> > support in a known working state. Unfortunately slight schema and >>>> > behavior differences between the two database platforms really forces >>>> > the need to perform that level of testing as well, which means one is >>>> > likely to encounter issues if they just try to create and use a >>>> > service's database in postgres at this point. >>>> > >>>> > Hope this has helped. >>>> > >>>> > -Julia >>>> > >>>> > [0]: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/931055 >>>> > [1]: >>>> https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… >>>> > >>>> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 3:32 AM Slawek Kaplonski <skaplons(a)redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> Hi, >>>> >> >>>> >> Dnia czwartek, 4 grudnia 2025 11:15:55 czas środkowoeuropejski >>>> standardowy Maksim Malchuk pisze: >>>> >>> Hi Slawek, >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I remember some presentations from the summit years ago but can't >>>> find >>>> >>> them. Do you have any links about this information? Maybe docs or >>>> gerrit >>>> >>> commits? >>>> >> I only got >>>> https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20170613-postgresql-status.… >>>> and I remember we have discussed that few cycles back in the Neutron room >>>> during the PTG. I don't remember exactly which PTG it was however >>>> >> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 11:49 AM Slawek Kaplonski < >>>> skaplons(a)redhat.com> >>>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dnia czwartek, 4 grudnia 2025 08:26:17 czas środkowoeuropejski >>>> standardowy >>>> >>>> Jiatong Shen pisze: >>>> >>>>> Hello community, >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> We are analyzing the possibility of using PostgreSQL in >>>> production. The >>>> >>>>> reason behind is that the PostgreSQL community is very open and >>>> growing >>>> >>>>> fast, besides many Chinese companies provide PG compatibility. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> My question is what are the pros and cons between using PG and >>>> MariaDB. >>>> >>>> Are >>>> >>>>> there any tools available to do online data migration for legacy >>>> >>>>> environments? Any insight is deeply appreciated. Thank you. >>>> >>>>> -- >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Best Regards, >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Jiatong Shen >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> It may be hard as some time ago at least some projects like e.g. >>>> Neutron >>>> >>>> stopped testing and supporting Postrgesql officially. So you may >>>> expect >>>> >>>> some issues there I believe. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Slawek Kaplonski >>>> >>>> Principal Software Engineer >>>> >>>> Red Hat >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> -- >>>> >>> Regards, >>>> >>> Maksim Malchuk >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> Slawek Kaplonski >>>> >> Principal Software Engineer >>>> >> Red Hat >>>> >>>> >> >> -- >> Sa Pham Dang >> Skype: great_bn >> Phone/Telegram: 0986.849.582 >> >> >> ---- typed from mobile, auto-correct typos assumed ----

1 0

Fwd: using postgresql in production
by Artem Goncharov 05 Dec '25

05 Dec '25

On Fri, 5 Dec 2025, 03:25 Sa Pham, <saphi070(a)gmail.com> wrote: > HI Artem, > > Could you share why you run Keystone with Postgresql ? > > I'm running Keystone with Postgresql as well, because my other application > is using Postgresql so I don't want to deploy two Database servers. > And it's working well without issue. > It is more or less a personal preference after working professionally for decades with both databases. Postgres features remind me more other major relational databases, while MySQL goes "own way". It's not about certain needs of Keystone, this is just a personal preference. > > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 11:10 PM Artem Goncharov <artem.goncharov(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> In my local tests I always use postgres for Keystone (as well in the >> keystone-ng testing) and it works. But I agree we do not have dedicated >> tests as of now, so some edge cases may be broken >> >> On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 at 16:37, Sean Mooney <smooney(a)redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> nova does not have tempet/devstack jobs either >>> however we never officially deprecated or removed support for PostgreSQL >>> >>> we still test it in our unit tests to ensure the schema applies and some >>> other minor test coverage but its also been a few years since there was >>> any real >>> end to end testing. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 04/12/2025 14:36, Julia Kreger wrote: >>> > Greetings, >>> > >>> > Ironic ended up removing CI jobs for postgres back in 2024[0] when >>> > keystone merged postgres incompatible changes which broke the CI job >>> > and rendered it impossible to test. Previous to that, I think in 2023 >>> > or 2022, neutron made some changes but quickly fixed the breaking >>> > changes once they were highlighted. The linked change has some back >>> > and forth and the mailing list post[1] which spawned job removal from >>> > Ironic. Ultimately, while people have expressed interest, that has >>> > never really materialized into action or engagement to keep postgres >>> > support in a known working state. Unfortunately slight schema and >>> > behavior differences between the two database platforms really forces >>> > the need to perform that level of testing as well, which means one is >>> > likely to encounter issues if they just try to create and use a >>> > service's database in postgres at this point. >>> > >>> > Hope this has helped. >>> > >>> > -Julia >>> > >>> > [0]: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/931055 >>> > [1]: >>> https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack… >>> > >>> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 3:32 AM Slawek Kaplonski <skaplons(a)redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> Hi, >>> >> >>> >> Dnia czwartek, 4 grudnia 2025 11:15:55 czas środkowoeuropejski >>> standardowy Maksim Malchuk pisze: >>> >>> Hi Slawek, >>> >>> >>> >>> I remember some presentations from the summit years ago but can't >>> find >>> >>> them. Do you have any links about this information? Maybe docs or >>> gerrit >>> >>> commits? >>> >> I only got >>> https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20170613-postgresql-status.… >>> and I remember we have discussed that few cycles back in the Neutron room >>> during the PTG. I don't remember exactly which PTG it was however >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 11:49 AM Slawek Kaplonski < >>> skaplons(a)redhat.com> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Hi, >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Dnia czwartek, 4 grudnia 2025 08:26:17 czas środkowoeuropejski >>> standardowy >>> >>>> Jiatong Shen pisze: >>> >>>>> Hello community, >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> We are analyzing the possibility of using PostgreSQL in >>> production. The >>> >>>>> reason behind is that the PostgreSQL community is very open and >>> growing >>> >>>>> fast, besides many Chinese companies provide PG compatibility. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> My question is what are the pros and cons between using PG and >>> MariaDB. >>> >>>> Are >>> >>>>> there any tools available to do online data migration for legacy >>> >>>>> environments? Any insight is deeply appreciated. Thank you. >>> >>>>> -- >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Best Regards, >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Jiatong Shen >>> >>>>> >>> >>>> It may be hard as some time ago at least some projects like e.g. >>> Neutron >>> >>>> stopped testing and supporting Postrgesql officially. So you may >>> expect >>> >>>> some issues there I believe. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> -- >>> >>>> Slawek Kaplonski >>> >>>> Principal Software Engineer >>> >>>> Red Hat >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Maksim Malchuk >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> Slawek Kaplonski >>> >> Principal Software Engineer >>> >> Red Hat >>> >>> > > -- > Sa Pham Dang > Skype: great_bn > Phone/Telegram: 0986.849.582 > > >

1 0

using postgresql in production
by Jiatong Shen 05 Dec '25

05 Dec '25

Hello community, We are analyzing the possibility of using PostgreSQL in production. The reason behind is that the PostgreSQL community is very open and growing fast, besides many Chinese companies provide PG compatibility. My question is what are the pros and cons between using PG and MariaDB. Are there any tools available to do online data migration for legacy environments? Any insight is deeply appreciated. Thank you. -- Best Regards, Jiatong Shen

7 7