- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[magnum][queens] issues
by Ignazio Cassano 28 Jan '19

28 Jan '19

I am trying patches you just released for magnum (git fetch git:// git.openstack.org/openstack/magnum refs/changes/30/629130/9 && git checkout FETCH_HEAD) I got same issues on proxy. In the old version I modified with the help of spyros the scripts under /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/magnum/drivers/common/templates/kubernetes/fragments because PROXY variables are not inherited in /etc/sysconfig/heat-params PROXY E NO PROXY variables are present but we must modify configure-kubernetes-master.sh to force them . /etc/sysconfig/heat-params echo "configuring kubernetes (master)" _prefix=${CONTAINER_INFRA_PREFIX:-docker.io/openstackmagnum/} export HTTP_PROXY=${HTTP_PROXY} export HTTPS_PROXY=${HTTPS_PROXY} export NO_PROXY=${NO_PROXY} echo "HTTP_PROXY IS ${HTTP_PROXY}" exporting the above variables when external network has a proxy, the master is installed but stack hangs creating kube master Resource Group Regards Ignazio

2 6

[neutron] CI meeting on 29.01.2019 cancelled
by Slawomir Kaplonski 28 Jan '19

28 Jan '19

Hi, I will not be able to drive Neutron CI meeting on Tuesday 29.01.2019 so lets cancel it for this week. — Slawek Kaplonski Senior software engineer Red Hat

1 0

[qa][tempest] Waiting for interface status == ACTIVE before checking status
by Terry Wilson 27 Jan '19

27 Jan '19

In the networking-ovn project, we hit this bug *very* often: https://bugs.launchpad.net/tempest/+bug/1728600. You can see the logstash here where it has failed 330 times in the last week: http://logstash.openstack.org/#dashboard/file/logstash.json?query=message%3… The bug has been around since 2017, and there are earlier reports of it than that. The bug happens in some projects outside of networking-ovn as well. At the core of the issue is that _get_server_port_id_and_ip4 loops through server ports to return ones that are ACTIVE, but there is a race where a port could become temporarily inactive if the ml2 driver continually monitors the actual port status. In the case we hit, os-vif started recreating the ovs port during an operation, so we would detect the status of the port as down and change the status, and then when the port is recreated we set the port status back to up. If the check happens while the port is down, the test fails. There have been comments that the port status shouldn't flip w/o any user request that would cause it, but that would mean that a plugin/driver would have to ignore the actual status of a port and that seems wrong. External things can affect what state a port is in. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/449695/7/tempest/scenario/manager.py adds a wait mechanism to checking the port status so that momentary flips of port status will not cause the test to inadvertently fail. The patch currently has 10 +1s. We really need to get this fixed. Thanks! Terry

4 7

[Seachlight] Team meeting today at 13:30UTC
by Trinh Nguyen 27 Jan '19

27 Jan '19

Hi team, We will have the team meeting today at 13:30UTC. Join us at #openstack-searchlight Bests, -- *Trinh Nguyen* *www.edlab.xyz <https://www.edlab.xyz>*

1 0

[ops] Berlin ops meet up march 2019
by Chris Morgan 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

We (the ops meet ups team) just heard that the city of Berlin just decided that March 8th 2019 is to be a public holiday. Our first reaction is to see if we can just pull the ops meet up forward one day (making it the 6th and 7th instead of the 7th and the 8th). Please let us know if this would be a problem for you ASAP. A good example might be if you have already booked flights. Since the even tickets have not been issued yet, we are hoping that's not the case for anyone. Moving to the 6th and 7th allows it to happen during normal business days for the host, Deutsch Telekom. I don't personally like the idea of trying to keep the 8th when it's a public holiday. Regards, Chris -- Chris Morgan <mihalis68(a)gmail.com>

1 1

[cinder] Proposing new Core Members ...
by Jay Bryant 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Team, I would like propose two people who have been taking a more active role in Cinder reviews as Core Team Members: First, Rajat Dhasmana who has been active in doing reviews the last couple of releases (http://www.stackalytics.com/?module=cinder-group&user_id=whoami-rajat) He has also made efforts to join our PTG and Forum sessions remotely, has helped to stay on top of bugs and has submitted a number of fixes recently. I feel he would be a great addition to our team. Also, I would like to propose Yikun Jiang as a core member. He had big shoes to fill, back-filling TommyLike Hu and he has stood to the challenge. Continuing to implement the features that TommyLike had in progress and taking an active role as a reviewer: (http://www.stackalytics.com/?module=cinder-group&user_id=yikunkero) I think that both Rajat and Yikun will be welcome additions to help replace the cores that have recently been removed. If there is no disagreement I plan to add both people to the core reviewer list in a week. Thanks! Jay Bryant (jungleboyj)

4 4

[dev] Upcoming git-review changes
by Stephen Finucane 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Happy Friday, Just a quick heads up that the upcoming release of git-review, likely 2.0, removes a feature. Currently, git-review will detect the presence of "bug", "lp", "blueprint" or "bp" in commit messages and, if found, set the Gerrit topic for that submitted review to something based on the blueprint/bug. As noted in the commit that removed this [1], this hadn't been updated to support StoryBoard and there was no desire to do so given the OpenStack-specific nature of this feature along with the fact that it often did the wrong thing. We (being the people who authored and reviewed the patch) think this is definitely a good thing to do, but if anyone has genuine concerns about the removal of this functionality, be sure to raise them here or on #openstack-infra before we push that release out next week. Cheers, Stephen [1] https://github.com/openstack-infra/git-review/commit/03768832c4

2 3

[dev][keystone] Keystone Team Update - Week of 21 January 2019
by Colleen Murphy 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

# Keystone Team Update - Week of 21 January 2019 ## News ### Technical Vision Statement >From time to time we talk about writing a mission statement for keystone, and then the idea always loses steam due to unfocused motivation. Luckily the TC has now given us some excellent starting points[1] and has requested we publish a similar team statement and/or update the overall guiding document[2]. We started taking notes on how keystone measures up with the overall vision[3] and whoever finds time first will write up an addition to the keystone contributor guide, where we can further discuss on the review. [1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/technical-vision.html [2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-January/001417.… [3] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-technical-vision-notes ### External and Tokenless Auth (What's old is new again) In working with the Edge computing group and the engineers at Oath we've been revisiting external authentication with X.509 as well as tokenless authentication[4][5], both ancient features in keystone. Though they are under-tested and have suffered mild bitrot they are still useful features. External authentication with mod_ssl can potentially be used as a drop-in replacement for the custom authentication plugin that Oath currently uses for their IdP Athenz. It does not on its own solve the Edge use case in which a client may be unable to connect to the keystone server for long periods of time, but the ideas can be used as a starting point for proper offline authentication. Tokenless authentication is closely tied to X.509 authentication and was a useful idea for starting to reduce the security impact of bearer tokens, but it was never fully implemented. We have been discussing revamping that feature and will be working on cleaning up the bitrot and the documentation around these features. [4] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/keystone/2019/keystone.2019-01-22-1… [5] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-keystone/%23openstack-k… ## Open Specs Stein specs: https://bit.ly/2Pi6dGj Ongoing specs: https://bit.ly/2OyDLTh ## Recently Merged Changes Search query: https://bit.ly/2pquOwT We merged 16 changes this week. ## Changes that need Attention Search query: https://bit.ly/2RLApdA There are 80 changes that are passing CI, not in merge conflict, have no negative reviews and aren't proposed by bots. ## Bugs This week we opened 4 new bugs and closed 2. Bug #1813057 (keystone:Medium) opened by Lance Bragstad https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1813057 Bug #1813085 (keystone:Undecided) opened by Tim Buckley https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1813085 Bug #1813183 (keystone:Undecided) opened by Lance Bragstad https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1813183 Bug #1813265 (keystone:Undecided) opened by Colleen Murphy https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1813265 Bugs fixed (2) Bug #1794864 (keystone:Medium) fixed by Lance Bragstad https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1794864 Bug #1804522 (keystone:Medium) fixed by Lance Bragstad https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1804522 ## Milestone Outlook https://releases.openstack.org/stein/schedule.html Feature proposal freeze happens next week, if you are working on a feature for Stein please have at least a WIP on Gerrit ASAP. The feature freeze is five weeks after that, so major features that are not already fairly far along may have to be pushed to Train. ## Shout-outs Thanks Guang for being super helpful with all of our X.509 and tokenless auth questions! ## Help with this newsletter Help contribute to this newsletter by editing the etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-team-newsletter Dashboard generated using gerrit-dash-creator and https://gist.github.com/lbragstad/9b0477289177743d1ebfc276d1697b67

1 0

Re: Ironic ibmc driver for Huawei server
by Julia Kreger 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Greetings, If your CI can vote on ci-sandbox, you should be able to vote on ironic. I don't remember having to grand permissions previously. If not, please let me know and I'll contact the Infrastructure team. -Julia On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 7:50 PM xmufive(a)qq.com <sokoban(a)foxmail.com> wrote: > Hi julia， > > It seems the basic features of our 3rd party CI is ready. It now could > verify +1 on openstack-dev/ci-sandbox[1]. > I am writing for asking for permission of review ironic project for > huawei-ironic-ci. > > The account used for huawei-ironic-ci is: > > Username > huawei-ironic-ci > Full Name Huawei Ironic CI > Email Address zhengxianhui(a)huawei.com > Registered Jan 14, 2019 8:00 PM > Account ID 29800 > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/630893/ > > > Thanks, > > ------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------ > *发件人:* "Julia Kreger"<juliaashleykreger(a)gmail.com>; > *发送时间:* 2019年1月9日(星期三) 晚上10:47 > *收件人:* "xmufive(a)qq.com"<sokoban(a)foxmail.com>; > *抄送:* "openstack-discuss"<openstack-discuss(a)lists.openstack.org>; > *主题:* Re: Ironic ibmc driver for Huawei server > > Ironic does not have a deadline for merging specs. We will generally > avoid landing large features the closer we get to the end of the > cycle. If third party CI is up before the end of the cycle, I suspect > it would just be a matter of iterating the driver code through review. > You may wish to propose it sooner rather than later, and we can begin > to give you feedback from there. > > -Julia > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:21 PM xmufive(a)qq.com <sokoban(a)foxmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Julia， > > > > When is the deadline of approving specs, I am afraid that huawei ibmc > spec will be put off util next release. > > > > Thanks > > Qianbiao NG > > > > > > ------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------ > > 发件人: "Julia Kreger"<juliaashleykreger(a)gmail.com>; > > 发送时间: 2019年1月9日(星期三) 凌晨2:26 > > 收件人: "xmufive(a)qq.com"<sokoban(a)foxmail.com>; > > 抄送: "openstack-discuss"<openstack-discuss(a)lists.openstack.org>; > > 主题: Re: Ironic ibmc driver for Huawei server > > > > Greetings Qianbiao.NG, > > > > Welcome to Ironic! > > > > The purpose and requirement of Third Party CI is to test drivers are > > in working order with the current state of the code in Ironic and help > > prevent the community from accidentally breaking an in-tree vendor > > driver. Vendors do this by providing one or more physical systems in a > > pool of hardware that is managed by a Zuul v3 or Jenkins installation > > which installs ironic (typically in a virtual machine), and configures > > it to perform a deployment upon the physical bare metal node. Upon > > failure or successful completion of the test, the results are posted > > back to OpenStack Gerrit. > > > > Ultimately this helps provide the community and the vendor with a > > level of assurance in what is released by the ironic community. The > > cinder project has a similar policy and I'll email you directly with > > the contacts at Huawei that work with the Cinder community, as they > > would be familiar with many of the aspects of operating third party > > CI. > > > > You can find additional information here on the requirement and the > > reasoning behind it: > > > > > https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/ironic-specs/specs/approved/third-par… > > > > We may also be able to put you in touch with some vendors that have > > recently worked on implementing third-party CI. I'm presently > > inquiring with others if that will be possible. If you are able to > > join Internet Relay Chat, our IRC channel (#openstack-ironic) has > > several individual who have experience setting up and maintaining > > third-party CI for ironic. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Julia > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 8:54 AM xmufive(a)qq.com <sokoban(a)foxmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi julia, > > > > > > According to the comment of story< > https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2004635 >, > > > 1. The spec for huawei ibmc drvier has been post here: > https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2004635 , waiting for review. > > > 2. About the third-party CI part, we provide mocked unittests for our > driver's code. Not sure what third-party CI works for in this case. What > else we should do? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Qianbiao.NG >

1 0

Why COA exam is being retired?
by Eduardo Gonzalez 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Reading the info in the COA site [0] says the following* "The OpenStack Foundation is winding down the administration of the COA exam".* Is there any reason for retiring the exam? I've tried to find a notice in the mailing list but not found anything at all. [0] https://www.openstack.org/coa/ Regards

6 6