- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[nova] Wallaby spec review day
by Balázs Gibizer 06 Nov '20

06 Nov '20

Hi, Wallaby Milestone 1 is four weeks from now. As Sylvain raised on the weekly meeting it is a good time to have a spec review day somewhere before M1. So I'm proposing 17th of November as spec review day. Let me know if it what you think. Cheers, gibi

1 0

[cinder][ceilometer][heat][instances] Installation Problems
by WALSH CHANG 06 Nov '20

06 Nov '20

To whom it may concern, I am new to openstack, I got several errors when I installed the service followed by the installation guide. My openstack version : stein Ubuntu 18.0.4 1. Cinder-api is in /usr/bin/cinder-api, but when I type service cinder-api status, it shows Unit cinder-api.service could not be found. 2. Ceilometer and Heat tab didn't show in the Dashboard. 3. I was trying to launch an instance, but I got the status error and I tried to delete, but the instances can not be deleted. And I used nova force-delete instance-id, the error message is ERROR (ClientException): Unexpected API Error. Please report this at http://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/ and attach the Nova API log if possible. <class 'nova.exception.AllocationDeleteFailed'> (HTTP 500) (Request-ID: req-e6c0d966-c7ec-4f20-8e9f-c788018a8d81) I explored the openstack installation myself, just wondering if there is any online hands-on training or course that I can enroll in? Thanks. Kind regards, Walsh

1 0

[neutron] Multi-AZ without L2 spanning between datacenter for external network
by Steve Vézina 06 Nov '20

06 Nov '20

Hi everyone, I am wondering if anyone got a multi-az deployment using OVS that work with seperate network fabrics which mean no L2 spanning between the AZs for external network? Thanks! Steve.

1 0

[tripleo][ci] ubi-8:3 has broken all centos-8 tripleo jobs
by Wesley Hayutin 05 Nov '20

05 Nov '20

Greetings, Bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1902846 Patch: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/761463 Status: RED Thanks to Sagi and Sandeep ( ruck / rovers ) the issue was caught yesterday. Few iterations on where and how to pin this back to a working ubi-8 image for containers builds. We are confident the current patch will set things back to working. Context: https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/introducing-red-hat-universal-base-image CentOS / RHEL ecosystem are not quite in sync yet.

1 1

ovs-dpdk bonding question
by Satish Patel 05 Nov '20

05 Nov '20

Folks, I have a compute node with only 2x10G port in that case, how do I configure ovs-dpdk with bonding support? I can understand if i have more than 2 nic ports then i can make one of nic port to management but in my case i have only two. Does that mean I can't utilize bonding features, is that true? How do other folks deal with this kind of scenario? (my deployment tool is openstack-ansible) ~S

1 0

[glance] Single store support removal
by Abhishek Kekane 05 Nov '20

05 Nov '20

Hi All The Single store glance support(default) was deprecated in Rocky release by Change-Id: I50189862454ada978eb401ec24a46988517ea73b The glance team will start working on removing single store support from the wallaby cycle and intended it to finish the same in wallaby or during milestone 1 of the next cycle. Below is the roadmap for removing single store configuration support from glance and glance_store repository. 1. Default Glance to configure multiple stores - Wallaby milestone 1 - https://review.opendev.org/#/c/741802/ 2. Convert single store unit and functional tests to use multiple stores - Wallaby milestone 1 3. Remove use of single store from glance - Wallaby milestone 2 4. Remove single stores support from glance_store - Wallaby milestone 3 to X milestone 1 We would like to encourage our users to start moving to multiple stores of glance if you are still using traditional single stores of glance in your deployments. Please let us know if you have any queries or suggestions about the same. Thank you, Abhishek

1 0

Openstack - File system changing to read-only mode
by ANUSUYA MANI 05 Nov '20

05 Nov '20

Openstack - File system changing to read-only mode after 1 or 2 days of creating the instance. Not able to access any files after that. I am using Ubuntu 18.04 instances. I have installed openstack on my server which is also ubuntu 18.04. I have enough disk space. After this issues, when i try to remount , i am not able to do. what is the cause of this kind of issue and how to resolve this. Kindly help me in resolving this. Attaching logs here.

2 1

[manila][ptg] Manila Wallaby PTG Summary
by Goutham Pacha Ravi 05 Nov '20

05 Nov '20

Hello Zorillas and all other interested Stackers! The OpenStack Manila Project Technical Gathering for the Wallaby development cycle was a successful meeting of project developers, users, operators and contributors to the rest of OpenStack, Kubernetes, Ceph and other communities - simply all zorillas and friends! I would like to thank the PTG organizing committee, (the Kendalls! :D) the infrastructure team, and everyone that contributed to the discussions. The following is my summary of the proceedings. I've linked associated etherpads, and resources to dig in further, and chat with us here, or on freenode's #openstack-manila! == Day 1 - Oct 26, 2020, Mon == === Manila Interop testing === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila-interop Discussion Items: - OSF Foundation Board and Interop Working Group members were apprised about Manila, its capabilities and problem space - Manila contributors answered questions regarding user workflows, tempest integration, vendor coverage and project maturity - Manila's addition to the Interop refstack suite will allow: * OpenStack clouds and distributions to certify their manila APIs for the "OpenStack Powered" trademark program, as well as, * OpenStack Manila third party integrations can claim the "OpenStack Compatible" label - A plan was charted to target an upcoming interop advisory with manila as an "Add-On" component - Interop team presented their idea for E2E testing for running container workloads on top of openstack Actions: - Vida Haririan (vhari), Liron Kuchlani (lkuchlan) and Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr) will create the interop test plan for Manila - Test plan target is the upcoming 2020.10 advisory === Manila Retrospective === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-victoria-retrospective Discussion Items: - Victoria Cycle Bug/Documentation Squash days were a big hit. 45% of the bug backlog was addressed with these squashes - thanks vhari/vkmc! - Team's doing a great job of farming low-hanging-fruit; but resolution is taking longer, we should timebox fixes for Medium prio low-hanging-fruit; high prio bugs cannot be tagged "low-hanging-fruit" - Team recognized the mentorship eagerness, and the opportunity providers in Victoria/Wallaby - Grace Hopper Celebration, Outreachy, Boston University Project and other venues - We couldn't complete the "migrate to focal fossa goal" - team was short handed at the end of the release, thanks to the goal champion, Ghanshyam Mann for ensuring we can make decent progress and target completion in wallaby - New TC tags (kubernetes-in-virt, assert:supports-accessible-upgrade, erstwhile tc:approved-release) were great, more to come in Wallaby (vulnerability-managed, supports-api-interoperability) - A GREAT DEAL of work was done on manila-tempest-plugin, and the team is thankful, and is sure users are appreciative of the focus we have on CI. - Great PTL leadership - but there's room to grow :D - Collaborative review sessions are a hit. Let's keep doing them! Actions: - We'll have a bug squash event closer to Wallaby-1 for bigger bugs that require API/DB changes as identified in the last Cycle (vkmc/vhari) - We'll have Bug/Documentation Squash after Wallaby-3 as well - Work on TC tags by Wallaby-1 - Contributors can actively seek Collaborative Review sessions for the work they're doing - CI flakiness needs to be audited and recurring test failures will be identified (dviroel) and discussed at an upcoming IRC meeting - Backend Feature Support Matrix will be improved and doc bugs will be filed for other issues identified (dviroel) === Cephadm, Triple-O and NFS-Ganesha === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tripleo-ceph Discussion Items: - fultonj/gfidente/fpantano presented three specs to chart the future of ceph deployment with tripleo. The ceph community will no longer support ceph-ansible as a deployment tool. - particularly interesting to the manila team was the fate of nfs-ganesha ("ceph-nfs") which doesn't have adequate support in ceph's new deployment tooling (cephadm and ceph orch) to cover tripleo's requirements of HA, or allow deployment flexibility like ceph-ansible used to (ceph-ansible would allow deploying nfs-ganesha as a standalone service on tripleo hosts) - the proposal was to retain the portions of ceph-ansible that were used for nfs-ganesha in tripleo while replacing the use of ceph-ansible with cephadm/ceph orch. - tripleo contributors were concerned about the future supportability of taking over the portion of the setup that ceph ansible does for tripleo today; they would be more comfortable if cephadm can be fixed in time for wallaby, or the portions of the code taken from ceph-ansible be in an independent repo Actions: - pursue cephadm/orch support for nfs-ganesha with ceph-orchestration team and understand timeline and upgrade implications when substituting the work - advance the work via specs == Day 2 - Oct 27, 2020, Tue == === Sub teams === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila-subteams Discussion Items: - gouthamr/vkmc proposed that client repos (python-manilaclient, manila-ui) and tempest (manila-tempest-plugin) have their own core teams - manila-core can be part of the initial core teams of those repos - the idea is to create focussed subteams that can to some degree of autonomy, govern these projects with the domain knowledge they have, have independent meetings and bug triages if they wish and dictate a roadmap - this way, review bandwidth can be adequately shared - the sub teams will allow manila core team mentoring efforts and provide an easier on ramp for new maintainers - team agreed that this is a good way forward, and acknowledged that they would not want to create more maintenance burden or create silos. Actions: - get https://review.opendev.org/758868/ merged - to avoid siloing, weekly IRC meeting will call upon subteams to share updates - focussing on a sub project doesn't mean we don't pay attention to other repos - attempt to record mentoring sessions and post it publicly for posterity === Extending shares via the Manila scheduler === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/share-stuck-in-extend-discussion Discussion Items: - manila share extension currently doesn't go through the scheduler - they directly hit the share service/host responsible for the share ( https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1855391) - this needs to be fixed for two reasons - a) capacity based calculations are off if scheduler is ignored, b) service health checks are not accounted for - there was a concern this change would break administrators that rely on this wrong behavior as storage pools fill up - this was called out as a corner case, and instead of having a global way to opt-in/out of using the scheduler for share extensions, we can build a "force" flag for privileged users that will preserve existing behavior Actions: - haixin will propose changes to the patch based on this feedback === Virtio-FS === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-manila-virtio-fs-support-vptg-october-2… Discussion Items: - virtiofs support has debuted in newer linux kernels and the libvirt/qemu/kvm communities have adopted it - in OpenStack, Nova can be made to use virtio-fs and expose Manila shares to tenant VMs - this provides a user experience improvement for manila users where mount automation has been a concern for a while, along with the desire to have strong multi-tenant separation on the network path which only a subset of manila backends are able to provide directly - virtiofs support does not replace DHSS=True or use of gateways like NFS-Ganesha (e.g.: CephFS, GPFS, etc) since those are still very much valuable when the consumer isn't nova VMs but baremetals, containers or non-OpenStack VMs. - nova team helped understand the feature submission process and provided guidance on how to integrate this feature in stages - the user experience, data models and cross service RPCs for this can be modeled around block device mapping, however we don't need to share or copy the implementation - this is surely a large multi-cycle work - nova team suggested that we begin with only attach/detach workflows in Wallaby Actions: - tbarron will propose a nova spec to allow "nova attach fs" (and detach) workflows - we'll continue to design "boot with share" or "boot from share" APIs, including scheduler changes through this cycle === Share Server Updates === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/share-server-update Discussion Items: - objective is to be able to update security services and share network subnets after share servers have been provisioned - users that want to make these updates have no access to share servers - a security service update can impact multiple share networks (and hence multiple share servers) and in turn multiple share resources, so there was a concern with granularity of the update - operators don't want to be involved with the updates, want users to be able to make the updates on resources they can see (security services or share networks) - if we allow end users to make these changes, we'll still need to break down the operation into more granular bits, and provide APIs to perform validation and multi-step updates Actions: - dviroel will propose spec updates based on the feedback gathered here: https://review.opendev.org/729292 - need other DHSS=True driver maintainers to pay attention to these changes === Share Affinity Hints === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-anti-affinity Discussion Items: - need a way to specify affinity or anti-affinity placement hints wrt existing resources (e.g: shares, share groups) - share groups provide a way to indicate affinity, but they may also encase shares into a construct and make individual operations on shares harder (you cannot add existing shares to a group or remove shares from a share group without deleting them, you can only create new members in a share group) - need a vehicle other than groups or share type extra specs to carry scheduling decisions that affect single shares - this mechanism shouldn't break cloud storage abstraction - cinder has had the ability for end users to add placement hints for affinity without breaking abstractions Actions: - carthaca will propose a specification for this work - we'll seek reviews from cinder contributors on the spec == Day 3 - Oct 28, 2020, Wed == === Responsibility for Code Reviews === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila Discussion Items: - a bulk of the day-2 operations that are being enhanced have significant impact on vendor driver implementations - we do have first party "reference" driver support for testing and designing manila APIs in a generic fashion but, not having vendor driver maintainer feedback is unfortunate - operator feedback is also very much appreciated, and we've made significant decisions because of it Actions: - proposers for new features that affect drivers must actively seek out vendor driver maintainers and operators and add them to review. The team will help identify these individuals - we'll track vendor/operator feedback and reviews as part of the review focus tracking we do through the cycle === Acting on Deprecation removals === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila Discussion Items: - tbarron proposed https://review.opendev.org/745206/ to remove old deprecated config options from manila - we should be doing this more actively each cycle, however, we held off from merging the code change above considering the impact to configuration and deployment tooling - driver module maintainers must adjust the deployment tooling/other usages accordingly asap Actions: - dviroel, carloss and gouthamr will review and merge https://review.opendev.org/745206/ === rootwrap-to-privsep migration === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-migration-from-rootwrap-to-privsep Discussion Items: - this has been selected as a community goal for Wallaby - privsep has not been used in manila so far - most first party and reference drivers (lvm, zfsonlinux, generic, container, ceph) use rootwrap heavily - some third party drivers also use rootwrap - team was concerned with the completion criteria wrt third party drivers - a stretch goal would be to investigate if dropping privileges for operations by substituting mechanisms is possible Actions: - carloss will work on this goal, no specification is necessary - adequate testing, admin/operator documentation will be provided - carloss will reach out to the third party driver maintainers to act on rootwrap removals - carloss/team will attack de-escalation/removing use of root privs to perform an operation, opportunistically === Secure RBAC improvements === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila-policy-changes Discussion Items: - manila will need to support splitting of the existing admin, member roles to system, domain and project admins and members - operators can define personas with these default roles using keystone's "role scope" - an accompanying feature is to provide "reader" role permissions as well - manila accepts the use of "policy.yaml" to drive RBAC, over "policy.json", but, the default is still "policy.json" and this needs to change due to several challenges, including the ability to have comments in the files Actions: - gouthamr will propose a spec for policy refresh across manila APIs/resources using these new role personas - making policy.yaml the default for policy overrides is going to be a community goal. We're targeting this transition to wallaby-1 in manila - we'll attempt to complete this effort in wallaby. there are several parts, collaboration is welcome! === CephFS Updates === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila-cephfs-driver-update Discussion Items: - vkmc provided an update on the cephfs feature roadmap - we need changes in cephfs (preferably in ceph-nautilus) to perform authorization, subvolume cloning, capacity reporting etc. This work is being tracked through tracker tickets in Ceph's tracking system - we stopped using shaman builds for ceph and nfs-ganesha in victoria cycle - consuming nfs-ganesha from ppa's has introduced new scenario test failures, vkmc is currently triaging them Actions: - start testing ceph octopus in the wallaby cycle - keep momentum on the ceph trackers and switch over from ceph-volume-client to ceph-mgr and implement create share from snapshot in the cephfs drivers - engage with ceph and nfs-ganesha communities to create a support matrix across nfs-ganesha versions, manila and cephfs === Divisive Language Correction === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila Discussion Items: - spotz joined us, and recapped the diversity and inclusion wg's work so far - manila team is determined to help resolve any divisive language and references in code and documentation - the team realizes that unconscious use of negative language is affecting the community's inherent desire to be welcoming and inclusive - no manila architecture or code references currently *need* the use of the divisive words identified by the working group and the wider openstack community - making changes is important to us, but we recognize it's just part of the story Actions: - we'll begin with a documentation change to remove the words identified in https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/divisivelanguage - we'll wait to coordinate a change of name for the development/trunk branch, and other "upstream" changes to databases, git, opendev - team actively welcomes any feedback == Day 5 - Oct 30, 2020, Fri == === Share and Server Migration graduation === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila Discussion Items: - we've graduated one major feature through the last couple of cycles, share migration is next - team agreed to keep share server migration as experimental APIs since they haven't had sufficient soak time - no significant changes have been made to share migration migration APIs since Ocata, leading to believe the APIs are stable and can be improved via microversions where necessary - not a lot of vendor driver implementations for driver optimized migration, NetApp driver only allows moving within a backend at the moment - generic migration improvements have been deprioritized, and need help in terms of High Availability of the Data service as well as providing a jobs table to track, and coordinate ongoing migrations - tests are being skipped at the gate because of flakiness Actions: - team will get in touch with third party vendors and guage interest in implementing driver optimized migration (or testing/supporting generic migration with their drivers) (carloss). Feedback from the vendors will drive our decision to graduate the share migration APIs in Wallaby. === Metadata for all share resources === Topic Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila-metadata-controller Discussion Items: - the proposal is to introduce a metadata API controller that can be inherited by the resource controllers - all user facing resources will have metadata capabilities, with consistent API methods - this is expected to benefit automation use cases, manila-csi and the upcoming virtio-fs effort Actions: - gouthamr will propose the spec for team's review, including identifying the resources that will be targeted in the Wallaby release - share metadata APIs will be improved to adhere to the API SIG spec: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-sig/guidelines/metadata.html === Client Project updates === Topic Etherpads: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-osc-wallaby-ptg and https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-ui-wallaby-ptg Discussion Items: - the team met with Nicole Chen, Ashley Rodriguez, Mark Tony from Boston University who will be working on the OpenStackSDK integration for Manila APIs - maaritamm provided an update on the OSC plugin interface implementation - vkmc provided an update on manila-ui feature gaps and the upcoming Outreachy internship Actions: - for some OSC plugin command implementations, we'll benefit from integrating with OpenStackSDK rather than manilaclient SDK, so we'll coordinate that work - maaritamm/vkmc will send an email to openstack-discuss to prioritize the commands left to implement in the OSC plugin - vkmc will drive consistency across cinder/manila for the user messages dashboards that were added in Victoria - we'll continue to work on closing the feature gap in manila-ui === Manila CSI Wallaby roadmap === Topic Document: https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1YJcv0EROWzYbV_8DM3DHVvDqdhlPhYRV8Np… Discussion Items: - users of manila-csi today deploy one driver per share protocol - future work on monitoring, common node plugin interactions requires us to rework the architecture to have one driver multiplex with multiple share protocol node plugins - upgrade impact as well as UI/UX impact was discussed and gman0 has documented them - share metadata is necessary to tag and identify shares Actions: - gman0 has started working on the code patches, and will benefit from reviews - mfedosin will take a look at the upgrade impact and share details for automation that can be done in the csi-operator - mfedosin will test gman0's latest patch to add share metadata via the storage class (as will folks from CERN) and provide feedback Thanks for reading thus far, there were a number of items that we couldn't cover, that you can see on the PTG Planning etherpad [1], if you own those topics, please add them to the weekly IRC meeting agenda [2] and we can go over them. The master meeting minutes document is available as well [3]. As usual, the whole PTG was recorded and posted on the OpenStack Manila Youtube channel [4] We had a great turn out and we heard from a diverse set of contributors, operators, interns and users from several affiliations and time zones. On behalf of the OpenStack Manila team, I deeply appreciate your time, and help in keeping the momentum on the project! [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila-planning [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Manila/Meetings [3] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-manila [4] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnpzT0InFrqATBbJ60FesKGYRejnTIoCW

1 0

[gate][all] assorted tempest jobs fail when IPv4 default route is not available
by melanie witt 05 Nov '20

05 Nov '20

Hi all, We have a gate bug [1] where if a CI VM does not have an IPv4 default route configured, the job will fail with one of the following errors: "[ERROR] /opt/stack/devstack/functions-common:230 Failure retrieving default route device" [2] or "[ERROR] /opt/stack/devstack/functions-common:104 Failure retrieving default IPv4 route devices" [3] because the die_if_not_set is being triggered. Most of the time, CI VMs come configured with an IPv4 default route but something changed recently (around Oct 23 or 24) to where we often get VMs that do not have an IPv4 default route configured and presumably only have an IPv6 default route. According to this logstash query [4] we have: 58 hits in the last 7 days, check and gate, all failures, all on the limestone-regionone node provider, various projects, various jobs Nate Johnson has proposed a fix here: https://review.opendev.org/761178 Reviews appreciated. Cheers, -melanie [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1902002 [2] example: https://zuul.openstack.org/build/7543021732cc4886b608553da58e81f9/log/contr… [3] example: https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/7fff839dd0bc4214ba6470ef40cf78fd… [4] http://logstash.openstack.org/#/dashboard/file/logstash.json?query=message:…

1 0

Editing libvirt xml file
by vladimir franciz blando 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hi, I edited the libvirt xml (virsh edit...) file of a running Windows server instance because I changed the video model type from cirrus to vmvga so it can support a higher resolution on a console (cirrus supports up to 1280 only). After editing, i "soft-rebooted" the instance and the new configuration sticks. That's awesome. But when you do a "hard-reboot" it will revert back to the original config. I also tried to do a "shut-down" then "start" again, but it still reads the original config. Not sure where it is reading the config from... Regards Vlad

3 5

[neutron][ovn] Neutron <-> OVN DB synchronization code
by Piotr Misiak 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hi, Do you know why Neutron <-> OVN DB sync code synchronizes "DEVICE_OWNER_ROUTER_HA_INTF" router ports here in this line: https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/164f12349fd8be09b9fd4f23b8cf8d2f3… ? As far as know there is no need for HA network ports for L3 virtual routers implementation in OVN, because OVN uses the internal BFD mechanism for Gateway Chassis reachability tests. Thanks, Piotr

1 0

[kolla] Kolla klub meetings paused
by Mark Goddard 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hi, We agreed at the PTG to try rebooting the Kolla klub meetings at a different time to involve some new members. Let's pause the meetings until then. Regards, Mark

1 0

[tripleo] next meeting Tuesday Nov 10 @ 1400 UTC in #tripleo
by Marios Andreou 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hello tripleo as discussed at PTG - we voted [1] to have IRC meetings every 2 weeks and next week will be 2 weeks since PTG :) Keeping the same day and time our next meeting will be ** Tuesday 10th November at 1400 UTC in #tripleo. ** Our regular agenda is at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TripleO Please add items you want to raise at https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tripleo-meeting-items . There were concerns voiced at PTG about low attendance in these meetings but at the same time quite a few folks voted to have it. So, let's try again and as with all the things we will re-evaluate based on all our feedback, Can I get a o/ if you plan on attending these meetings? Or even if you can't but plan to read the meetbot logs ;) Obviously now would be a good time to speak up if you hate tuesdays at 1400 UTC and want to propose some alternative for us to consider, thanks, marios [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tripleo-ptg-wallaby-community-process

1 0

[ptl] Victoria Release Community Meeting
by helena＠openstack.org 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hi Everyone, We are looking to do a community meeting following The Open Infrastructure Summit and PTG to discuss the Victoria Release. If you’re a PTL, please let me know if you’re interested in doing a prerecorded explanation of your project’s key features for the release. We will show a compilation of these recordings at the community meeting and follow it with a live Q&A session. Post community meeting we will have this recording live in the project navigator. Cheers, Helena

8 10

[cinder] Block Storage API v2 removal
by Brian Rosmaita 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

The Block Storage API v2 was deprecated in the Pike release by Change-Id: I913c44799cddc37c3342729ec0ef34068db5b2d4 The Cinder team will be removing it during the Wallaby development cycle. At the Wallaby PTG, the question came up about Block Storage API v2 support in the python-cinderclient. We looked at some proposals [0] at today's Cinder meeting and plan to make a decision at next week's meeting [1]. If you have strong feelings about this issue, please make them known on the etherpad [0], the ML, or by attending the next Cinder meeting (1400 UTC in #openstack-meeting-alt on Wednesday 11 November). [0] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/python-cinderclient-v2-support-removal [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-wallaby-meetings

1 0

[tc] weeklu update
by Mohammed Naser 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hi everyone, Here's an update for what happened in the OpenStack TC this week. You can get more information by checking for changes in openstack/governance repository. # Patches ## Open Reviews - Adding reno and warnings example for JSON->YAML goal doc https://review.opendev.org/760956 - Select JSON to YAML goal for Wallaby cycle https://review.opendev.org/760957 - Add goal for migrate RBAC policy format from JSON to YAML https://review.opendev.org/759881 - Add diablo_rojo liaison preferences https://review.opendev.org/759718 - Add danms liaison preferences https://review.opendev.org/758822 - Add ricolin liaison preferences https://review.opendev.org/759704 - Add gmann liaison preference https://review.opendev.org/758602 - Resetting projects' TC liaisons empty https://review.opendev.org/758600 - Move Placement under Nova's governance https://review.opendev.org/760917 - Clarify the requirements for supports-api-interoperability https://review.opendev.org/760562 - Add Resolution of TC stance on the OpenStackClient https://review.opendev.org/759904 ## General Changes - Implement distributed leadership in tools and schema https://review.opendev.org/757966 - Adding missing IRC nick https://review.opendev.org/759724 - Update dansmith IRC nick https://review.opendev.org/760561 - Update projects with Telemetry PTL election result https://review.opendev.org/760206 - Appoint XueFeng Liu as Senlin PTL https://review.opendev.org/758122 - Begin the 'X' release naming process https://review.opendev.org/759888 - Appoint Adam Harwell as Octavia PTL https://review.opendev.org/758121 - Add nomination for TC chair https://review.opendev.org/758181 - Appoint Rafael Weingartner as CloudKitty PTL https://review.opendev.org/758120 - Appoint Frode Nordahl as OpenStack Charms PTL https://review.opendev.org/758119 - Select Privsep as the Wallaby Goal https://review.opendev.org/755590 ## Project Updates - Adopting the DPL governance model for oslo https://review.opendev.org/757906 Thanks for reading! Mohammed -- Mohammed Naser VEXXHOST, Inc.

1 0

Random 503 error while running using api/command line
by Deepa KR 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hi All Good Day We have a Train Openstack setup using juju maas configured in HA with 3 controllers. When using the openstack api getting a timeout error randomly. Also sometimes getting "Unknown Error (HTTP 503)" or Remote end closed connection without response while using the command line . openstack server list --all-projects *Unknown Error (HTTP 503)* Kindly suggest to look in the right direction. Regards, Deepa K R

1 0

[tripleo][ci] Monday Nov 2
by Wesley Hayutin 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Greetings, The tripleo ci team has identified a handful of patches that we'd like to land prior to Nov 2, the day docker.io goes away. We've hit some new bugs and have also tuned a few things to try and make sure we can get patches to merge. Our current focus is across master, victoria, ussuri and centos-8 train, and queens while reducing coverage in rocky and stein. A list of the prioritized gerrit reviews can be found here: https://hackmd.io/MlbZ_izSTEuZsCWTJvu_Kg?view The entire topic can be found here: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:new-ci-job Thanks all.

4 4

[nova] Why nova needs password-less SSH to do live migraiton?
by Zhi CZ Chang 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

3 5

[ironic] Configuration mold follow-up
by Jaunteva, Aija 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hi, to follow up on Ironic PTG session about Configuration molds [1] I'm scheduling a call to discuss remaining items (mainly storage of the molds). Anyone interested please add your availability in Doodle [2]. When time slot decided, will share call details. Regards, Aija [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/ironic-wallaby-ptg line 216 [2] https://doodle.com/poll/dry4x5tbmhi6x6p3

2 3

[Neutron] PTG summary
by Slawek Kaplonski 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Hi, Below is my summary of the Neutron team sessions which we had during the virtual PTG last week. Etherpad with notes from the discussions can be found at [1]. ## Retrospective of the Victoria cycle >From the good things during _Victoria_ cycle team pointed: * Complete 8 blueprints including the _Metadata over IPv6_ [2], * Improved feature parity in the OVN driver, * Good review velocity >From the not so good things we mentioned: * CI instability - average number of rechecks needed to merge patch in last year can be found at [3], * Too much "Red Hat" in the Neutron team - and percentage of the reviews (and patches) done by people from Red Hat is constantly increasing over last few cycles. As a main reason of that we pointed that it is hard to change companies way of thinking that dedicating developer to the upstream project means that they lose developer in downstream. * Migration of our CI and Zuul v3 took us a lot of time and effort - but good thing is that we accomplished that in the Victoria cycle :) During that session we also agreed on some action items for the Wallaby cycle: * keep talking about OVN details - Miguel Lavalle and me will work on some way to deliver talks about Neutron OVN backend and OVN internals to the community during next months. The idea is to maybe propose some talks ever 6 weeks or so. This may make ovn driver development more diverse and let operators to thing about migration to the ovn backend. ## Review of the existing meetings We reviewed list of our existing upstream meetings and discussed about ideas on how to increase number of attendees on the meetings. We decided to: * drop neutron-qos meeting as it's not needed anymore * advertise more meetings and meetings' agenda on the OpenStack mailing list - I will send reminders with links to the agenda before every meeting * Together with Lajos Katona we will give some introduction to the debugging of CI issues in Neutron* ## Support for old versions Bernard started discussion about support for the old releases in Neutron and Neutron stadium projects. For Neutron we decided to mark __Ocata__ branch as unmaintained already as its gate is already broken. For the __Pike__ and never branches we will keep them in the __EM__ phase as there is still some community interest to keep those branches open. For the stadium projects we decided to do it similary to what we did while looking for new maintainers for the projects. We will send email "call for maintainers" for such stable branches. If there will be no voluneers to step in, fix gate issues and keep those branches healthy, we will mark them as __unmaintained__ and later as __End of Life__ (EOL). Currently broken CI is in projects: * networking-sfc, * networking-bgpvpn/bagpipe, * neutron-fwaas And those are candidates to be marked as unmaintained if there will be no volunteers to fix them. Bernard Cafarelli volunteered to work on that in next days/weeks. ## Healtcheck API endpoint We discussed as our healtcheck API should works. During the discussion we decided that: * healtcheck result should __NOT__ rely on the agents status, it should rely on worker's ability to connect to the DB and MQ (rabbitmq) * Lajos will ask community (API experts) about some guidance how it should works on the whole OpenStack level, * As for reference implementation we can check e.g. Octavia [4] and Keystone [5] which already implemented it. ## Squash of the DB migration script Rodolfo explained us what are benefits of doing such squash of the db migration scripts from the old versions: * Deployment is faster: we don't need to create/delete tables or create+update other ones - the win is small possibly in the magnitude of 5s per job, * DB definition is centralized in one place, not in original definition plus further migrations - that is most important reason why we really should do that, * UTs faster: removal of some older checks. The problem with this may be that we need to do that carefully and be really verbose about with such changes we may break stadium projects or 3rd party projects which are doing db migration too. To minimalize potential breakage, we will announce such changes on the OpenStack discuss mailing list. Rodolfo volunteered to take propose squash up to Liberty release in W cycle. Together with this squash we will also document that process so in next cycles we should be able to do squashes for newer releases in easier way. Lajos volunteered to help with fixing Neutron stadium projects if that will be needed. ## Switch to the new engine facade We were discussing how to move on and finally finish old Blueprint [6]. We decided that together with Rodolfo we will try how this new engine facade will work without using transaction guards in the code. Hopefully that will let us move on with this. If not, we will try to reach out to some DB experts for some help with this. ## Change from rootwrap to the privsep This is now community goal during the Wallaby cycle so we need to focus on it to accomplish that transition finally. This transition may speed up and make our code a bit more secure. Rodolfo explained us multiple possible strategies of migration: * move to native, e.g. * replace ps with python psutils, not using rootwrap or privsep * replace ip commands with pyroute2, under a privsep context (elevated permissions needed) * directly translate rootwrap to privsep, executing the same shell command but under a privsep context To move on with this I will create list of the pieces of code which needs to be transitioned in the Neutron repo and in the stadium projects. Current todo items can be found on the storyboard [7]. ## Migration to the NFtables During this session we were discussing potential strategies on how to migrate from the old iptables to the new nftables. We need to start planning that work as it major Linux distributions (e.g. RHEL) are planning to deprecate iptables in next releases. It seems that currently all major distros (Ubuntu, Centos, OpenSuSE) supports nftables already. We decided that in Wallaby cycle we will propose new _Manager_ class and we will add some config option which will allow people to test new solution. In next cycles we will continue work on it to make it stable and to make upgrade and migration path for users as easy as possible. There is already created blueprint to track progress on that topic [8]. We need to migrate: * Linuxbridge firewall, iptables OVS hybrid firewall, * L3 code (legacy router, DVR router, conntrack, port forwarding), * iptables metering, * metadata proxy, * dhcp agent for when it does metadata for isolated networks and namespace creation, * neutron-vpnaas - ipsec code, * and maybe something else what we didn't found yet. ## Nova-Neutron cross project session We had very interesting discussion with Nova team. We were discussing topics like: * NUMA affinity in the neutron port * vhost-vdpa support * default __vnic_type__/__port flavour__ Notes from that discussion are available in the nova's etherpad [9]. ## Neutron scalling issues At this session we were discussing issues mentioned by operators on the Forum sessions a week before the PTG. There was couple of issues mentioned there: * problems with retries of the DB operations - we should migrate all our code to the oslo.db retries mechanism - new blueprint [10] is created to track progress on that one. * problems with maintenance of the agents, like e.g. DHCP or L3 agents - many of those issues are caused by how our agents are designed and to really fix that we would need very deep and huge changes. But also many of those issues can be solved by the __ovn__ backend - **and that is strategic direction in which neutron wants to go in the next cycles**, * Miguel Lavalle and I volunteered to do some profiling of the agents to see where we are loosing most of the time - maybe we will be able to find some _low hanging fruits_ which can be fixed and improve the situation at least a bit, * Similar problem with neutron-ovs-agent and especially security groups which are using _remove group id_ as a reference - here we also need some volunteers who will try to optimize that. ## CI (in)stablility On Thursday we were discussing how to improve our very poor CI. Finally we decided to: * not recheck patches without giving reason of recheck in the comment - there should be already reported bug which should be linked in the _recheck_ comment, or user should open new one and link to it also. IN case if the problem was e.g. related to infra some simple comment like _infra issue_ will also be enough there, * To lower number of existing jobs we will do some changes like: * move *-neutron-lib-master and *-ovs-master jobs to the experimental and periodic queues to not run them on every patch, * I will switch _neutron-tempest-plugin-api_ job to be deployed with uwsgi so we can drop _neutron-tempest-with-uwsgi_ job, * Consolidate _neutron-tempest-plugin-scenario-linuxbridge_ and _neutron- tempest-linuxbridge_ jobs, * Consolidate _neutron-tempest-plugin-scenario-iptables_hybrid and _neutron- tempest-iptables_hybrid jobs, Later we also discussed about the way how to run or skip tests which can be only run when some specific feature is available in the cloud (e.g. _Metadata over IPv6_). After some discussion we decided to add new config option with list of enabled features. It will be very similar to the existing option _api_extensions_. Lajos volunteered to work on that. As last CI related topic we discussed about testing DVR in our CI. Oleg Bondarev volunteered to check and try to fix broken _neutron-tempest-plugin- dvr-multinode-scenario_ job. ## Flow based DHCP Liu Yulong raised topic about new way of doing fully distributed DHCP service, instead of using _DHCP agent_ on the nodes - RFE is proposed at [11]. His proposal of doing Open Flow based DHCP (similar to what e.g. ovn-controller is doing) is described in [12]. It could be implemented as an L2 agent extension and enabled by operators in the config when they would need it. As a next step Liu will now propose spec with details about this solution and we will continue discussion about it in the spec's review. ## Routed provider networks limited to one host As a lost topic on Thursday we briefly talked about old RFE [13]. Miguel Lavalle told us that his company, Verizon Media, is interested in working on this RFE in next cycles. This also involves some work on Nova's side which was started by Sylvain Bauza already. Miguel will sync with Sylvain on that RFE. ## L3 feature improvements On Friday we were discussing some potential improvements in the L3 area. Lajos and Bence shown us some features which their company is interested in and on which they plan to work. Those are things like: * support for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection * some additional API to set additional router parameters like: * ECMP max path, * ECMP hash algorith * --provider-allocation-pool parameter in the subnets - in some specific cases it may help to use IPs from such _special_ pool for some infrastructure needs, more details about that will come in the RFE in future, For now all those described above improvements are in very early planning phase but Bence will sync with Liu and Liu will dedicate some time to discuss progress on them during the __L3 subteam meetings__. ## Leveraging routing-on-the-host in Neutron in our next-gen clusters As a last topic on Friday we were discussing potential solutions of the _L3 on the host_ in the Neutron. The idea here is very similar to what e.g. __Calico plugin__ is doing currently. More details about potential solutions are described in the etherpad [14]. During the discussion Dawid Deja from OVH told us that OVH is also using very similar, downstream only solution. Conclusion of that discussion was that we may have most of the needed code already in Neutron and some stadium projects so as a first step people who are interested in that topic, like Jan Gutter, Miguel and Dawid will work on some deployment guide for such use case. ## Team photo During the PTG we also made team photos which You can find at [15]. [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/neutron-wallaby-ptg [2] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/metadata-over-ipv6 [3] https://ibb.co/12sB9N9 [4] https://opendev.org/openstack/octavia/src/branch/master/octavia/api/ healthcheck/healthcheck_plugins.py [5] https://docs.openstack.org/keystone/victoria/admin/health-check-middleware.… [6] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/enginefacade-switch [7] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2007686 [8] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/nftables-migration [9] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-wallaby-ptg [10] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/oslo-db-retries [11] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1900934 [12] https://github.com/gotostack/shanghai_ptg/blob/master/ shanghai_neutron_ptg_topics_liuyulong.pdf [13] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1764738 [14] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/neutron-routing-on-the-host [15] http://kaplonski.pl/files/Neutron_virtual_PTG_October_2020.tar.gz -- Slawek Kaplonski Principal Software Engineer Red Hat

3 4

Intel 82599 dpdk support with centos8
by Satish Patel 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

Folks, I am trying to get dpdk working with my OVS on CentOS-8 and I am stuck here so I need advice from folks who can help me here. I have an HP c7000 chassis with ProLiant BL460c Gen9 blade. I am running CentOS-8 with following version of ovs-dpdk [root@compute-2 usertools]# ovs-vswitchd --version ovs-vswitchd (Open vSwitch) 2.12.0 DPDK 18.11.2 I am using openstack-ansible to set up openvswitch with dpdk, and so far everything went well but I am stuck in the end. [root@compute-2 usertools]# ovs-vsctl add-port br-provider dpdk-0 -- set Interface dpdk-0 type=dpdk options:dpdk-devargs=0000:06:00.0 ovs-vsctl: Error detected while setting up 'dpdk-0': Error attaching device '0000:06:00.0' to DPDK. See ovs-vswitchd log for details. ovs-vsctl: The default log directory is "/var/log/openvswitch". Here is the error message. [root@compute-2 usertools]# tail -f /var/log/openvswitch/ovs-vswitchd.log 2020-11-04T02:46:31.751Z|00303|dpdk|INFO|EAL: PCI device 0000:06:00.0 on NUMA socket 0 2020-11-04T02:46:31.751Z|00304|dpdk|INFO|EAL: probe driver: 8086:10f8 net_ixgbe 2020-11-04T02:46:31.751Z|00305|dpdk|ERR|EAL: Driver cannot attach the device (0000:06:00.0) 2020-11-04T02:46:31.751Z|00306|dpdk|ERR|EAL: Failed to attach device on primary process 2020-11-04T02:46:31.751Z|00307|netdev_dpdk|WARN|Error attaching device '0000:06:00.0' to DPDK 2020-11-04T02:46:31.751Z|00308|netdev|WARN|dpdk-0: could not set configuration (Invalid argument) 2020-11-04T02:46:31.751Z|00309|dpdk|ERR|Invalid port_id=32 This is what my NIC firmware/driver [root@compute-2 usertools]# ethtool -i eno50 driver: ixgbe version: 5.1.0-k-rh8.2.0 firmware-version: 0x800008fb, 1.2028.0 expansion-rom-version: bus-info: 0000:06:00.1 [root@compute-2 usertools]# python3 ./dpdk-devbind.py --status Network devices using DPDK-compatible driver ============================================ 0000:06:00.0 '82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Backplane Connection 10f8' drv=vfio-pci unused=ixgbe Network devices using kernel driver =================================== 0000:06:00.1 '82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Backplane Connection 10f8' if=eno50 drv=ixgbe unused=vfio-pci I did enabled IOMMU & huge mem in grub iommu=pt intel_iommu=on hugepagesz=2M hugepages=30000 transparent_hugepage=never Not sure what is wrong here and the big question is does this NIC support DPDK or not?

1 0

In Openstack (devstack) i am able to create maximum of 3 volumes only
by ANUSUYA MANI 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

I have 3 volumes of 80GB each and when i try to create a volume snapshot or a new volume i am not able to do that. i get the error 'schedule allocate volume:Could not find any available weighted backend'. The volume quotas are set properly yet i am not able to create more than 3 volumes. i have attached screenshots of the volume quotas and error message. Kindly <https://i.stack.imgur.com/ThvMo.jpg> requesting to help me solve this issue.

1 0

[cinder] Wallaby PTG summary available
by Brian Rosmaita 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

I've posted a summary of the discussions we had last week: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CinderWallabyPTGSummary Feel free to make any corrections or clarifications. Also, look through to remind yourself what actions you volunteered to perform (you can search for your IRC nick or the text ACTION). cheers, brian

1 0

[barbican] Stable Branch Liaison Update
by Douglas Mendizabal 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Hi openstack-discuss, I've updated the Cross Project Liaison Wiki [1] to revert our Stable Branch liaison to myself as current Barbican PTL. I am wondering what the process is to get myself added to the barbican-stable-maint group in gerrit? [2] Unfortunately, our only team member on that team has not been very active the last few months and we have a growing list of patches to the stable branches that we have been unable to merge. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated. Thanks - Douglas Mendizábal [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Stable_Branch [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/admin/groups/1097

2 1

[masakari] Wallaby PTG Summary
by Radosław Piliszek 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Hello Everyone! Masakari had 3 2-hour sessions and we managed to discuss a broad range of proposals and assign tasks to interested parties. (And this was my first time chairing a PTG as PTL). Thank you, everyone who participated! Here is a summary of the PTG discussions. The whole discussion has been written down in the etherpad. [1] We acknowledged that the project has lost its momentum during the last cycle (Victoria) and we hope to restore it now. To this end, we are reviving interesting old blueprints and specs. Some of these are already at the implementation stage, ready for reviews. Some of the discussed proposals fall into the 'low code impact, high (positive) usability impact' category, the most prominent being ways to have more flexibility in disabling/enabling the HA scope as well as generally more friendly approach towards user errors (not evacuating 'pinned' instances). On the other hand, some proposals involve deeper architectural changes to Masakari, such as the shift from reliance on Pacemaker/Corosync stack to Consul and/or etcd (possibly also for coordination), as well as making Masakari inspect the host status via both inbound and outbound means (including power management for checks and fencing). To this end, we plan to investigate a possible integration with Ironic as our gate to the baremetal world. Another proposal worth noting is the Masakari 'restore previous state' workflow, meant to help operators move instances back to their original location once the local problem is solved. Yet another proposal is increasing the resilience under the current scope (Pacemaker/Corosync) by retrying host checks (several sampled observations rather than one) and implementing adaptive rules to consider large-scale failures. We also discussed general maintenance tasks. We decided to give some love to the documentation and make sure it's not self-contradictory and also in agreement with the actual code, as well as include general recommendation on how Masakari is supposed to be deployed to have it work optimally. Finally, we discussed a few miscellaneous proposals such as making Masakari a better container world citizen by removing the reliance on systemd. [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/masakari-wallaby-vptg Kind regards, -yoctozepto

1 0

[openstack-helm] No OSH meeting today
by Gage Hugo 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Hello, the meeting for today has been cancelled, we will meet next week.

1 0

[keystone] No keystone team meeting Nov 3
by Nikolla, Kristi 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Hi all, There will be no keystone team meeting on IRC today, on November 3rd. Best, Kristi

1 0

[cinder] reminder: weekly meeting wednesday 4 nov at 1400utc
by Brian Rosmaita 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

After two weeks of not having meetings due to summit/forum/ptg, the cinder team will be holding its weekly meeting at the usual time (1400 UTC) and location (#openstack-meeting-alt) tomorrow (wednesday 4 november). People who had been following daylight saving (or summer) time until recently, keep in mind that although the UTC time of the meeting has not changed, it may be an hour earlier for you in your local time. cheers, brian

1 0

[neutron] Team meeting
by Slawek Kaplonski 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Hi, Just a quick reminder. Today at 14:00 UTC we will have neutron team meeting in the #openstack-meeting-3 room @freenode. Meeting's agenda is available in [1]. If You have any topics which You want to discuss, please add them to the "On demand" section. See You all at the meeting :) [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/Meetings -- Slawek Kaplonski Principal Software Engineer Red Hat

1 0

[placement][nova][cinder][neutron][blazar] Placement governance switch(back)
by Stephen Finucane 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Placement has been a separate project with its own governance since Stein [1]. Since then, the main drivers behind the separation have moved onto pastures new and with Tetsuro sadly declaring his non- candidacy for the PTL position for Wallaby [2], we're left in the unenviable position of potentially not having a PTL for the Wallaby cycle. As such, it's probably time to discuss the future of Placement governance. Assuming no one steps forward for the Placement PTL role, it would appear to me that we have two options. Either we look at transitioning Placement to a PTL-less project, or we move it back under nova governance. To be honest, given how important placement is to nova and other projects now, I'm uncomfortable with the idea of not having a point person who is ultimately responsible for things like cutting a release (yes, delegation is encouraged but someone needs to herd the cats). At the same time, I do realize that placement is used by more that nova now so nova cores and what's left of the separate placement core team shouldn't be the only ones making this decision. So, assuming the worst happens and placement is left without a PTL for Victoria, what do we want to do? Stephen PS: Apologies if I missed other projects with an interest in placement. I did try to catch them all /o\ [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-February/002575… [2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-September/01749…

8 10

[neutron][core team] (Re)adding Oleg Bondarev to the Neutron core team
by Slawek Kaplonski 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Hi, I'm glad to announce that I just fast-tracked back Oleg to the Neutron core team. Oleg was Neutron core in the past and now, since few months he is again one of the most active Neutron reviewers [1]. Welcome back in the core team Oleg :) [1] https://www.stackalytics.com/report/contribution/neutron-group/90 -- Slawek Kaplonski Principal Software Engineer Red Hat

3 2

[cyborg] PTG Summary and Wallaby Release Schedule
by yumeng bao 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Hi all, Thank you all for the PTG participation! All our agreements and decisions are marked in the etherpad[1] with AGREED word. And I have proposed the Wallaby_Release_Schedule[2] on Cyborg wiki page to track features with milestone. [1]https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cyborg-wallaby-goals [2]https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cyborg/Wallaby_Release_Schedule Regards, Yumeng

1 0

[neutron] bug deputy report for week of 2020-10-26
by Bence Romsics 03 Nov '20

03 Nov '20

Hi Team, We had the following new bugs on the week of the PTG. Sorry for sending the report a bit late. Critical: * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1901534 Neutron fail to create networks because of MTU value changes proposed: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:bug/1901534 Medium: * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1901527 Agent API gets broken if OVN DB is upgraded to the one introducing chassis_private change series proposed: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:bug/1901527 * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1901992 Original default route in DVR SNAT namespace is not recovered after creating and deleting /0 extraroute The first fix proposed won't work since it would have been an API change. No fix proposed for the re-stated problem (bug comments #4 and #7) at the moment. * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1902512 neutron-ovn-tripleo-ci-centos-8-containers-multinode fails on private networ creation (mtu size) unassigned Low: * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1901936 [OVN Octavia Provider] OVN provider loadbalancer failover should fail as unsupported fix proposed: https://review.opendev.org/760209 Incomplete: * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1902211 Router State standby on all l3 agent when create Looks vpnaas related. The reporter is asking for help in debugging a lock that's never released. Not reproducible at will at the moment. * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1901707 race condition on port binding vs instance being resumed for live-migrations Broken out of https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1815989. * https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1463631 60_nova/resources.sh:106:ping_check_public fails intermittently Sporadic re-appearance of an ages old bug, with hardly enough information to reproduce at will. Cheers, Bence

1 0

[tripleo] please avoid creating ansible playbooks that call modules for trivial tasks
by Bogdan Dobrelya 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hi, In today TripleO client development we invoke ansible playbooks instead of Mistral workflows. I believe this may only be justified for non-trivial things. Otherwise please just import python modules into the client command actions without introducing additional moving parts in the form of ansible modules (that import the same python modules as well). Ansible brings declarative DSL that sometimes can better and simpler and faster describes things to do and shape inputs data, than if the same would be done in python, in the client. What should be the trivial thing and non-trivial then? Well, I think that example [0] illustrates such a trivial thing. A new playbook [1] would only install a few packages then "returns" back into python and calls a new ansible module [2]. And that new module only wraps [3] the same code being removed from the client: from tripleo_common.image import build ... manager = build.ImageBuildManager(<args>) I see no point of adding a new playbook and a new module for that trivial example. Those 4 packages could (and should) be as well installed from the client caller code without any ansible involved in the middle IMO. [0] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/759954/ [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/759953/3/tripleo_ansible/playbooks/cli-overc… [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/759953/3/tripleo_ansible/ansible_plugins/mod… -- Best regards, Bogdan Dobrelya, Irc #bogdando

6 9

[charms] OpenStack Charms 20.10 release is now available
by Peter Matulis 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

The 20.10 release of the OpenStack Charms is now available. This release brings several new features to the existing OpenStack Charms deployments for Queens, Rocky, Stein, Train, Ussuri, Victoria and many stable combinations of Ubuntu + OpenStack. Please see the Release Notes for full details: https://docs.openstack.org/charm-guide/latest/2010.html == Highlights == * OpenStack Victoria OpenStack Victoria is now supported on Ubuntu 20.10 (natively) and Ubuntu 20.04 LTS (via UCA). * Gnocchi and external root CA for S3 The gnocchi charm now supports the configuration of an external root CA in the gnocchi units. This is useful when an encrypted S3 (storage backend) endpoint uses certificates that are not managed by Vault. * Arista - Supported releases The neutron-api-plugin-arista charm now supports all OpenStack releases starting with Queens. * Neutron Gateway and additional data on ports and bridges The neutron-gateway charm now marks the openvswitch ports and bridges it creates as managed by the charm. This allows for less riskier cleanup mechanisms to be implemented. * cinder charm: Allow specifying the default volume type The cinder charm can now set the default volume type. This is to support scenarios where multiple storage backends are being used with Cinder. * Action based migration from Neutron ML2+OVS to ML2+OVN New actions have been introduced to enable migration of a Neutron ML2+OVS based deployment to ML2+OVN. * New charm: ceph-iscsi The ceph-iscsi charm has been promoted to supported status. This charm implements the Ceph iSCSI gateway, which provides iSCSI targets backed by a Ceph cluster. == OpenStack Charms team == The OpenStack Charms team can be contacted on the #openstack-charms IRC channel on Freenode. == Thank you == Lots of thanks to the below 30 charm contributors who squashed 45 bugs, enabled support for a new release of OpenStack, improved documentation, and added exciting new functionality! Alex Kavanagh Andrea Ieri Andreas Jaeger Aurelien Lourot Chris MacNaughton Corey Bryant Dan Ardelean David Ames Dmitrii Shcherbakov Edin Sarajlic Edward Hope-Morley Felipe Reyes Frode Nordahl Gabriel Adrian Hemanth Nakkina James Page Jorge Niedbalski Liam Young Martin Kalcok Martin Kopec Marton Kiss Michael Quiniola Nobuto Murata Pedro Guimaraes Peter Matulis Ponnuvel Palaniyappan Rodrigo Barbieri Xav Paice camille.rodriguez zhhuabj -- OpenStack Charms Team

1 0

Re: [keystone][policy] user read-only role not working
by melanie witt 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Adding back the mailing list +openstack-discuss@ On 11/1/20 23:15, its-openstack(a)zohocorp.com wrote: > Dear Openstack, > > we are implementing this reader role through kolla-ansible. Need > help in understanding the policy file for adding custom role both in > nova and keystone. You can learn how to use the policy file directly by reading the docs I linked earlier: * https://docs.openstack.org/security-guide/identity/policies.html * https://docs.openstack.org/oslo.policy/train/admin/policy-json-file.html And then the APIs you can control access to in nova are shown in this sample file: * https://docs.openstack.org/nova/train/configuration/sample-policy.html APIs in keystone are shown in this sample file: * https://docs.openstack.org/keystone/train/configuration/samples/policy-yaml… I'm afraid I don't know anything about how to adjust the policy file through kolla-ansible though. Cheers, -melanie > ---- On Fri, 02 Oct 2020 02:12:39 +0530 *melanie witt > <melwittt(a)gmail.com>* wrote ---- > > On 9/25/20 07:25, Ben Nemec wrote: > > I don't believe that the reader role was respected by most > projects in > > Train. Moving every project to support it is still a work in > progress. > > This is true and for nova, we have added support for the reader role > beginning in the Ussuri release as part of this spec work: > > https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/ussuri/implemented/p… > <https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/ussuri/implemented/p…> > > > Documentation: > > https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/policy-concepts.html > <https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/policy-concepts.html> > > > To accomplish a read-only user in the Train release for nova, you can > DIY to a limited extent by creating custom roles and adjusting your > policy.json file [1][2] accordingly. There are separate policies for > GET/POST/PUT/DELETE in many cases so if you were to create a role > ReadWriteUser you could specify that for POST/PUT/DELETE APIs and > create > another role ReadOnlyUser and specify that for GET APIs. > > Hope this helps, > -melanie > > [1] > https://docs.openstack.org/nova/train/configuration/sample-policy.html > <https://docs.openstack.org/nova/train/configuration/sample-policy.html> > > [2] https://docs.openstack.org/security-guide/identity/policies.html > <https://docs.openstack.org/security-guide/identity/policies.html> > > > On 9/24/20 11:58 PM, its-openstack(a)zohocorp.com > <mailto:its-openstack@zohocorp.com> wrote: > >> Dear Openstack, > >> > >> We have deployed openstack train branch. > >> > >> This mail is in regards to the default role in openstack. we are > >> trying to create a read-only user i.e, the said user can only > view in > >> the web portal(horizon)/using cli commands. > >> the user cannot create an instance or delete an instance , the same > >> with any resource. > >> > >> we created a user in a project test with reader role, but in > >> horizon/cli able to create and delete instance and similar to other > >> access also > >> if you so kindly help us fix this issue would be grateful. > >> > >> the commands used for creation > >> > >> > >> > >> $ openstack user create --domain default --password-prompt > >> test-reader(a)test.com <mailto:test-reader@test.com> > <mailto:test-reader@test.com <mailto:test-reader@test.com>> > >> $ openstack role add --project test --user test-reader(a)test.com > <mailto:test-reader@test.com> > >> <mailto:gowtham.sankar@zohocorp.com > <mailto:gowtham.sankar@zohocorp.com>> reader > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks and Regards > >> sysadmin > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >

1 0

[tripleo] stable/victoria for tripleo repos
by Marios Andreou 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hello all, I got some pings about tripleo stable/victoria so here is an update. The tripleo-ci team is busy preparing and we are almost ready. Basically we've blocked branching until we have adequate CI coverage. This means check & gate jobs but also promotion jobs so that check & gate aren't running with stale content. tl;dr We are aiming to branch victoria tripleoclient & common today and everything else next week - with more details below but please note: PLEASE AVOID MERGING to the stable/victoria tripleoclient/common that will appear after [4] until we are confident that our ci coverage is working well. Status: Most of our 'core' (standalone/scenarios/undercloud etc) check/gate jobs match on branch like [1] so we expect those to run OK once there is a stable/victoria available. There is ongoing work for branchful, upgrade, 3rd party and ovb jobs but we will not block branching on those. The victoria integration pipeline [2] (which produces current-tripleo) is in good shape. It was blocked on a nit in the component pipeline but it is resolved with [3]. Once we have a victoria promotion then we should be all clear to branch stable/victoria. Actions: A). today: make stable/victoria for python-tripleoclient & tripleo-common. The change at [4] will do this once merged. We will use this to see our check/gate jobs run against victoria & fix issues. B). next week: once we are happy with A). AND we've had a promotion, we release and make stable/victoria for everything else. Hopefully B). will happen end of next week but that depends on how well the above goes (plus inevitable delays cos PTG), I'll repeat this cos it's important: PLEASE AVOID MERGING to stable/victoria tripleoclient/common for now until we are confident that our jobs are doing the right thing! As always grateful for a sanity check or any thoughts about any of the above - I'm pretty new to this (weshay has been a great help so far thank you weshay++), thanks, marios [1] https://opendev.org/openstack/tripleo-ci/src/commit/d5514028452f9d427949f5a… [2] https://review.rdoproject.org/zuul/builds?pipeline=openstack-periodic-integ… [3] https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/30654/ [4] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/759449/

1 2

[nova] python3.9 support
by Balázs Gibizer 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hi, I run unit and functional tests (where applicable) for nova, python-novaclient, os-vif, placement, osc-placement, os-traits, os-resource-classes with python 3.9 and everything is green. I've proposed some tox.ini targets where it was needed [1][2][3] Cheers, gibi [1]https://review.opendev.org/#/c/760884/ [2]https://review.opendev.org/#/c/760890/ [3]https://review.opendev.org/#/c/760912/

2 1

Python 3.9 is here in Debian Sid
by Thomas Goirand 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hi there! Matthias Klose decided that uploading Python 3.9 on the 14th of this month (yes, the same day of the OpenStack release) would be fun. I am now really having fun ... fixing bugs! :) What's not so funny for me, is that some key packages like Greenlet or lxml aren't built yet for Python 3.9, even though they should. As a consequence, I just need to wait to be able to upload to Unstable. So this will delay my usual announcement for the release GA in Debian (even though the unofficial Victoria repo for Buster is ready and I could spawn VMs on Buster + Victoria). Anyways, all of this will settle slowly. Though Python 3.9 is here to stay, and to soon reach Ubuntu as well (it's planned for the next release). It'd be nice if projects were starting to investigate gating on Python 3.9 as early as possible. As much as I can tell, there's not so many issues to fix. The first one I fixed is here: https://review.opendev.org/758237 but I don't expect much more, and hopefully, I'll be able to propose more patch as I find the issues. Must we wait until Python 3.9 reaches Ubuntu to enable gating in the OpenStack projects? FYI, I do expect Victoria to run over Python 3.9 in Bullseye. Please don't reply with the usual "Victoria doesn't support it", because that's irrelevant. I'm fine with backporting patches, as long as they also exist in Wallaby. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)

7 9

[magnum] hyperkube deprecation situation
by Ionut Biru 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hi guys, I was hoping that in Victoria there will be a decision regarding this topic. Currently, if I use vanilla magnum, I'm stuck on 1.18.6 being the latest version, even so 1.18.10 was released. We are kinda stuck on a version that maybe in the near future is pruned to security issues. How do other operators are using magnum (vanilla) and keeping their kubernetes up to date? Are operators using a forked version of https://review.opendev.org/#/c/752254/ ? -- Ionut Biru - https://fleio.com

2 2

[openstack-ansible] Wallaby PTG results
by Dmitriy Rabotyagov 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hi, Bellow you may find summarization of descisions that were taken during PTG discussion. Victoria retrospective ---------------------------- 1. We're pretty far from dropping resource creation code out of the tempest, as we should respect TripleO needs here. So leaving as is during this cycle but adding option to be possible to omit resource creation. 2. We decided to postpone prometheus integration (as well as libvirtd exporter) as we don't have enough resource to implement and moreover support it in the future. 3. Decided to leave ELK stack in ops repo as for now. 4. Adjusting bootstrap-ansible to pick up gerrit patches idea was also postponed as has super low prio and we have a lot of more useful things on our hands 5. We didn't have much progress in tempest coverage of existing roles, we should proceed with it during W. Same is applicable to the roles overall speedup topic. Descisions taken for Wallaby -------------------------------------- 1. Remove nspawn from docs, and set it to unmaintained state in V. Remove code in W. 2. Document how upgrade paths for distro installs are difficult, and may/may not align with OSA releases 3. Check through the logs what roles are we covering with tempest, and what not 4. extract deprecation messages from journal files to the separate log 5. Continue working on speeding up OSA runtime: - Fight with skipped tasks (ie by moving them to separate files that would be included) - most valid for systemd service, systemd_networkd and python_venv_build roles - Try to split up variables by group_vars - Try to use include instead of imports again 6. Set TRANSFORM_INVALID_GROUP_CHARS to ignore in V and replace invalid chars in groups later. For octavia we can temporary add 2 groups (old style and new style) for migration process. 7. Try to speedup zuul required projects clone process and talk to zuul folks 8. Finally do Integrated repo deploy for Zun and sync deployment process with service docs 9. Installation of ara for deployer needs - ARA deploy on localhost, configured by variables - Option for remote ARA - Option for UI server locally 10. Create Root CA on deploy host and overall SSL approach refactoring. Futher discussion in SPEC: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/758805/ Original etherpad for the reference https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/osa-certificates-refactor 11. For ansible 2.11 (which requires py3.8 on deploy host) we can use pyenv for ansible venv to workaround this, and leave hosts themselves on their native python 12. Move neutron-server to standalone group in env.d 13. Add Senlin tempest test - Add plugins (source only) to os_tempest https://review.opendev.org/754044 - Upstream senlin endpoints fix https://review.opendev.org/74987 - Enable senlin tempest plugin in integrated repo https://review.opendev.org/#/c/754105/ - Test patch for senlin/tempest https://review.opendev.org/754045 14 Document in os_nova defaults way to manage ratios via api (ie set cpu_allocation_ratio to 0.0) (regarding https://review.opendev.org/#/c/758029/) 15. Add support for zookeeper deployment for services coordination (low priority) 16. Check where we don't use uwsgi role and see if we can use it there now (like designate, neutron-api) (low priority) -- Kind Regards, Dmitriy Rabotyagov

1 0

[undercloud][train]Fatal error during train undercloud deployment
by dangerzone ar 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hi all, I keep getting the same fatal error below during undercloud deployment. My environment is VMware VM Centos7 undercloud (openstack train) and refers to the official openstack guideline. TASK [tripleo_container_manage : Print failing containers] ********************* Monday 02 November 2020 19:55:07 +0800 (0:00:00.182) 0:17:50.677 ******* fatal: [undercloud]: FAILED! => changed=false msg: 'Container(s) with bad ExitCode: [u''container-puppet-ironic'', u''container-puppet-zaqar''], check logs in /var/log/containers/stdouts/' I even tried with clean different VM and all give me same error. Appreciate some help please. Thank you.

2 2

[Cloudkitty][ptg] CloudKitty Wallaby PTG outcome
by Rafael Weingärtner 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hey people, Thanks to everyone who attended the CloudKitty PTG sessions, we covered a lot during the meeting. The Etherpad is available at [1]. In Etherpad [1], I added the notation "TODO(XXX):" in the topics we discussed, that require effort from someone. The work can be either writing a use case story, developing extensions/features, or creating test cases. Therefore, if you are interested in working with that item, do not hesitate and put your name there. Anyone in the community is welcome. [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cloudkitty-ptg-wallaby -- Rafael Weingärtner

1 0

[nova] PTG
by Balázs Gibizer 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hi, Thank you all for the PTG participation! All our agreements and decisions are marked in the etherpad[1] with AGREED word. To avoid loosing this information I made a dump of the etherpad on Friday at the end of the PTG and attached to this mail Cheers, gibi [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-wallaby-ptg

1 0

[Glance] Wallaby PTG summary
by Abhishek Kekane 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Hi All, We had our second virtual PTG last week from 26th October to 30th October 2020. Thanks to everyone who joined the virtual PTG sessions. Using bluejeans app we had lots of discussion around different topics for glance, glance + cinder and glance + tempest. I have created etherpad [1] with Notes from session and which also includes the recordings of each discussion. The same etherpad includes milestone wise priorities at the bottom. Below topics we discussed during PTG: 1. Victoria retrospection 2. Image encryption (progress) 3. Remove single store configuration from glance_store 4. Cache-API 5. Duplicate downloads 6. Extend issue when using nfs cinder backend (with cinder team) 7. Multi-format images 8. Cluster awareness 9. Improve performance of ceph/rbd store of glance (multi-threaded rbd driver) 10. Task API's for general users 11. Tempest enhancement/bridge gap between glance and tempest 12. Code cleanup, enhancements 13. Wallaby priorities Kindly let me know if you have any questions about the same. [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/glance-wallaby-ptg Thank you, Abhishek

1 0

Fwd: [MURANO] DevStack Murano "yaql_function" Error
by İzzettin Erdem 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

Thanks Andy. Regards. Forwarded Conversation Subject: [MURANO] DevStack Murano "yaql_function" Error ------------------------ Gönderen: Andy Botting <andy(a)andybotting.com> Date: 30 Nis 2020 Per, 14:13 To: İzzettin Erdem <root.mch(a)gmail.com> Cc: Rong Zhu <aaronzhu1121(a)gmail.com>, < openstack-discuss(a)lists.openstack.org> Hi İzzettin, Thanks for your interest. Complete log link is at below. It is happening > when i try to deploy or update an environment. > > http://paste.openstack.org/show/792444/ > I've encountered the error AttributeError: 'method' object has no attribute '__yaql_function__' in our environment recently. I believe it started after we upgraded to the Stein release. I haven't tracked it down yet, but calls to the YAQL function: std:Project.getEnvironmentOwner() in a Murano app seem to generate it. It's good to know that at least someone else has reproduced this. cheers, Andy ---------- Gönderen: İzzettin Erdem <root.mch(a)gmail.com> Date: 2 May 2020 Cmt, 16:08 To: Andy Botting <andy(a)andybotting.com> Hi Andy, I solved this problem, it is happening when you try to create or update an environment on existing network. If you change the network with "create new" parameter, it stuck on "creating -or updating- environment" state and after that throws connection error. So i searched Murano network errors and i found this: https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E73172_01/E73173/html/issue-21976631.html. I applied these steps and i created successfully an environment just only with "create new" network parameter. After all these, i realized my devstack environment has no internet connection and because of this murano-agent could not install. So i tried to install Murano on my OSA stable/train test environment and i came with success until last step. Murano-agent installed but this time agent could not connect to rabbitmq instance. I discussed this with OSA IRC channel and i think i have to struggle with this for a long time. Apologize for this long mail but i wanted to inform you. Thanks. Regards. ---------- Gönderen: Andy Botting <andy(a)andybotting.com> Date: 3 May 2020 Paz, 14:24 To: İzzettin Erdem <root.mch(a)gmail.com> Hi İzzettin, Glad you got it sorted. I think you've probably just worked around the issue. Using your new method, you're probably just avoiding the std:Project.getEnvironmentOwner YAQL call now. I've also worked around it in our environment, but I'd like to solve it properly. When I get some time to look into it properly, I'll let you know. cheers, Andy

3 3

Weird iptables problem
by Florian Rommel 01 Nov '20

01 Nov '20

Hi, so we deployed a test cluster with 8 total nodes. Openstack ussuri, Ubuntu 20.04 , opevswitch, octavia. Everything works more or less as it should , however when deploying a loadbalancer (which works perfectly), instances on the same node as the amphora deployment loose all access via public up after open switch logs a message : modified security group “long uuid”, which is a sec group belonging to octavia. What effect does that have with the rest? Questions: Should ufw be on and started? How can we troubleshoot this more in depth? Why does the lb work perfectly whole instance with floating up loos all access from the internet but the lb works fine passing thru the web services. One more thing. Does anyone have a recommended sysctl.conf Settings list for Ubuntu/ openstack ussuri? Thanks already and have a nice weekend, //f

1 0

[tc][all][ Wallaby Virtual PTG Summary
by Ghanshyam Mann 01 Nov '20

01 Nov '20

Hello Everyone, I am summarizing the TC PTG discussion and action items. Wallaby Leaderless assignment --------------------------------------- Four projects are still pending for leadership assignment. We discussed the next step. If you would like to help any of these or using in your cloud/distro, this is the right time to step up: 1. Karbor - Action item: diablo_rojo will start the retirement process. 2. Qinling - Action item: gmann to start the retirement process. 3. Searchlight -Action item: gmann to start the retirement process. 4. Placement - Action item: gibi will update TC about the final discussion and accordingly mnaser to propose the patch in governance. Victoria Retrospective: ----------------------------- There are a couple of things TC finished in last cycle, few of them are: * Reduced size of TC to speed up the things. * Updated policy to add projects faster. * Outlined Distributed Project Leadership Model as an alternate leadership solution of PTL. Oslo will be the first project to try this new model. * Normalized retirement processes. All the retired repos cleanup is finished. * Tag cleanups & additions This is not complete yet but started with tc-approved release tag in the Victoria cycle. * Merged UC with TC. This is one of the key things finished and the best strategy to make users-developers work more closely. TC Meeting time: ----------------- TC is going to try (re-try) the weekly meeting every Thursday 15:00 UTC. * Action Items: mnaser: propose patch. TC policy regarding OpenStack client: ----------------------------------------------- Forum Discussion: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/vSummit2020_FeatureGap This is one of the important items and still no good progress on this. From TC perspective, we talked about how to ask or motivate projects to migrate to OSC. TC needs to be very clear on whether it's a strict policy or just guidelines. After long discussion on this we are going with the below strategy: These strategies will be documented as TC resolution. * All user docs should have `openstack` client commands. * Focus on user docs first and then ops docs later * All ci-tooling should have `openstack` client usage * Use the process to find what is missing so we can prioritize it. * Action items: - diablo_rojo to work on initial resolution proposal[1] Finalize the Wallaby cycle goal selection: --------------------------------------------------- There are two proposals for the Wallaby community-wide goals. First is 'oslo.rootwrap to oslo.privsep' which is already being discussed in the last cycle also and all set to be selected[2]. 2nd proposal came up during PTG itself. During policy-popup PTG[3], it came up that deprecating the JSON formatted of policy file will be a good advance step before the projects move to new RBAC policies. This will help operators to smoothly migrate to new policies. This does not involve much work and ok to select as 2nd goal for Wallaby cycle, TC agreed to have below goals for Wallaby cycle: * Migrate from oslo.rootwrap to oslo.privsep [2] * Migrate Default Policy Format from JSON to YAML [4] *Action: - TC to merge the patches which selects both goals for Wallaby cycle. TC tag cleanup: ------------------- In the Victoria cycle, we started the process to audit all the TC tags and start cleanup those. We removed the 'tc:approved-release' tag in the Victoria cycle[5]. In this PTG we discussed two more tags. 1. assert:supports-zero-downtime-upgrade: Currently, there is no project who has this tag and also no testing framework available. Testing for zero downtime is not so easy in upstream testing. We decided to remove this tag as it is advertising something we aren't doing. If anyone interested to spend time on this in the future then we can add it after projects start testing it and document it. 2. assert:supports-api-interoperability: This tag is whether project API is interoperable also or not and this is important from the interop trademark program also. We only have Nova having this tag. Our goal is to promote more projects to apply for this tag. During the discussion, we found that we need to clarify this tag more clearly. For example, this tag is not about implementing the microversion but any versioning schema which provides the feature (API changes) discoverability. And also it is about how we change the API not how our APIs are currently. As long as services have some versioning mechanism to discover the changes and follow the API SIG guidelines for interoperability, and test it via branchless testing way, that service is applicable to apply for this tag. TC will document this tag in a more clear way and encourage each project to start working on applying this tag. * Action: - Graham to put up a change to update the wording to allow for discovery mechanisms[6] - Should include the release in which they started to assert this tag. - also documents that it's about following the guidelines for future changes not existing one. - gmann - Should socialize this out to the projects after we get the documentation improvements landed. - gmann k8s Community Bridging : -------------------------------- This is one of the exciting discussion for everyone. We hosted this cross-community meeting with Kubernetes steering committee teams. Bob and dims from the Kubernetes steering committee joined us in this discussion. It was started with a quick introduction from both teams and then started the discussion on the below topics [11] * Sharing governance models: k8s governance hierarchy is LF->CNCF->k8s steering commitee->various SIG/working group. k8s Steering the committee consists of 7 elected members and doesn't actually influence the direction of the code instead leave it to SIG and arch committee. There is no chair in this committee and host biweekly private as well as public meetings. Each SIG (repos) team has approver and reviewer roles where reviewer review the code and approver are responsible for merging the code. Naser explained the OpenStack governance model. * What are your 3 biggest issues that are barriers to growth/sustainability as a community? as a project? - Going up the contribution ladder is hard. - Stale/emeritus membership in reviewer/approver level groups. - Mono repo makes it so that each SIG involved needs to review which can slow things down. * Area/Domain mapping vs service/repo centered teams - mono repo forces people to work together and it's a little more diverse who is reviewing - mono repo is bad because sometimes things need to be in multiple places like documentation - mono repo struggles with libraries especially on testing the external one. * Related Ecosystem projects comparisons The SIG lead has to sign off and accept that they are willing to take ownership + handle maintenance + releasing etc. It is general consensus that we try to distribute much work as possible to the subgroup and keep it out of k/k. There is general consensus across k8s leadership that work should be delegated out to subgroups. For API interoperability challenge in a distributed model, k8s has conformance tests which exercise the API performance and vendors try and upload conformance results every release or dot release. * Common FOSS topics release and CI part was discussed. and also on how COVID things are impacting community health. k8s community almost lost their independents or part-time contributors. also, the k8s community is doing 3 releases per year compared to 4. * Staying connected going forward To stay connected it will be a good idea if we extend an invite for K8s to join PTG. Upstream Investment Opportunities: ----------------------------------------------- We have three upstream opportunities defined for 2020[1] but there is no help on any of these, even in previous (2018, 2019) upstream opportunities also. We started the discussion if we need to continue this for 2021 years also or just stop defining it and decide the area to help when we have someone interested. Before deciding anything on this mnaser will discuss this with the board of directors and get their opinion. * Action Items: - mnaser to find ways to engage with members and talk with them. - mnaser to talk to board about infrastructure - mnaser to talk to board about platinum members contribution levels + what are they doing to drive engagement. Pop Up Team Check In: ----------------------------- Currently, we have two active popup teams 1. policy 2. Encryption. TC checked the progress on both teams. The policy team is very active and finished some work in Voctoria cycle (cyborg finished it and Barbican started) and also hosted forum[8], PTG sessions[9], and discussed Wallaby development plan. This team host biweekly meeting to discuss and review the progress. The encryption team is also active. Josephine explained the progress on this. Glance spec is merged. Both teams will continue in Wallaby cycle also. Completing the Gerrit breach audit : ---------------------------------------------- There are still 19 teams pending to finish this audit. Those are listed in etherpad - https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/code-audit-gerrit-breach-tracker We encourage all those pending teams to finish the audit, TC members will start following with those projects every week. * Action: - TC to follow up every week on progress Other topics: ----------------- We ran out of time and all the pending (below) topics will be discussed in TC regular meetings. TC will skip this month's meeting[10] but will have weekly meetings on 12th Nov onwards. *Better way to test defined testing runtime *Monitoring in OpenStack: Ceilometer + Telemetry + Gnocchi state *Stable core team maintainer and process to recruit the new members and adding core team members in stable core list. Detailed discussions are in this Etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-wallaby-ptg [1] https://review.opendev.org/759904 [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/755590/ [3] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/policy-popup-wallaby-ptg [4] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/759881/ [5] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-October/017786.… [6] https://review.opendev.org/760562 [7] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/upstream-investment-opportuni… [8] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/consistent-and-secure-default-policies-walla… [9] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/policy-popup-wallaby-ptg [10] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-October/018439.… [11] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/kubernetes-cross-community-topics -gmann

1 0

devstack installation error - [qa-octavia]
by Ratnopam Chakrabarti 31 Oct '20

31 Oct '20

I tried installing devstack in ubuntu 20.04 with no luck. Are the instructions > at https://docs.openstack.org/devstack/latest/ and > https://docs.openstack.org/devstack/latest/guides/devstack-with-lbaas-v2.ht… > still valid? Could anyone please confirm?

2 3