Open Stack

LBaaS will not be available in Grizzly-3, it is getting a feature freeze
extension, so will be available in Grizzly-RC1 (likely about two weeks out).

Dan

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Trinath Somanchi <
trinath.somanchi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks a lot Dan.
>
> Will LBaaS be available in Grizzly-2 ?
>
> Thanking you.
>
> -
> Trinath
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Dan Wendlandt <dan at nicira.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Trinath,
>>
>> The code is still coming together and is not quite ready for testing.
>>  I'd suggest waiting a week until the code and appropriate devstack support
>> is merged.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Trinath Somanchi <
>> trinath.somanchi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi-
>>>
>>> >
>>> > I Have the folsom code installed with me. Can any one guide me on how
>>> to
>>> > integrate and test LBaaS in the folsom setup I have.
>>>
>>> You'll have to run code from master, and cherry-pick onto it the LBaaS
>>> patches from gerrit.
>>>
>>> Can any one guide me on how to get the code base detailed above.
>>>
>>> I was unable to get the code base with git. I think I'm missing some
>>> thing and re-inventing the issue.
>>>
>>> Can any one guide me kindly on this.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> -
>>> Trinath
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Eugene Nikanorov <
>>> enikanorov at mirantis.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Salvatore,
>>>>
>>>> Per yesterday's meeting it was decided that we'll rework patches to
>>>> adopt haproxy-on-the-host approach, rather than on VM.
>>>> It's temporary and much simplified solution just to make things work
>>>> for grizzly.
>>>> Therefore there's no point in reviewing and trying those patches.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Eugene.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Salvatore Orlando <
>>>> sorlando at nicira.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Eugene,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for putting this together.
>>>>> Even if sidelined by other work items, I am assisting Mark and Dan in
>>>>> the process of reviewing the various LBaaS patches.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some comments inline.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Salvatore
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19 February 2013 06:15, Trinath Somanchi <
>>>>> trinath.somanchi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> > Hi -
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Very much excited for the help on testing of LBaaS.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Can you guide me/the enthusiasts  on how to test the LBaaS, and
>>>>> Which code
>>>>> > base to download. Because I find, more branches about LBaaS.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are several patches on gerrit, as we decided to split them to
>>>>> simplify review.
>>>>> You should use all of them. LBaaS API support, as well as the CLI, is
>>>>> instead already merged in master branches (quantum and
>>>>> python-quantumclient)
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I Have the folsom code installed with me. Can any one guide me on
>>>>> how to
>>>>> > integrate and test LBaaS in the folsom setup I have.
>>>>>
>>>>> You'll have to run code from master, and cherry-pick onto it the LBaaS
>>>>> patches from gerrit.
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Please help me integrate the LBaaS into the folsom installation.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think you can - at least we haven't tried (and probably we
>>>>> won't, unless LBaaS goes into the backport roadmap).
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > thanks in advance.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Eugene Nikanorov <
>>>>> enikanorov at mirantis.com>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Hi Dan, Mark, folks,
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I know you have been working on reviewing and testing of LBaaS
>>>>> patches and
>>>>> >> run into several problems preventing the service to provide complete
>>>>> >> solution.
>>>>> >> We're currently putting all our efforts into integration testing.
>>>>> Please
>>>>> >> find the updated instruction on how to setup/run the service:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Let me step through the list of problems that Dan has identified:
>>>>> >> 1. Strict key checking.
>>>>> >> By default ssh and scp use strict key checking, so once host
>>>>> fingerprint
>>>>> >> is changed for the known host, ssh/scp switch into interactive mode
>>>>> and ask
>>>>> >> if it is ok.
>>>>> >> We've fixed it via ssh/scp option that disables strict key checking.
>>>>>
>>>>> During yesterday's meeting, and on gerrit as well, I was told that the
>>>>> requirement for SSH (and hence also the paramiko dependency) were
>>>>> going, and were being replaced by a RPC mechanism similar to Quantum's
>>>>> DHCP/L3 agents.
>>>>> Is this information incorrect?
>>>>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> 2. "VM getting deleted, but then lbaas code not realizing it was
>>>>> deleted"
>>>>> >> There was I bug in the code, which incorrectly updated device
>>>>> status in
>>>>> >> case of error and didn't delete it from DB.
>>>>> >> We've fixed it.
>>>>> >>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is good. Another thing I was not sure is whether we're keeping
>>>>> isolated VMs or running haproxy in isolated namespaces instead. It
>>>>> seems we're keeping the VMs approach. Do we still have a fixed pool of
>>>>> VMs?
>>>>>
>>>>> >> 3. File permissions on key file
>>>>> >> Key file is used in ssh/scp that are being run with "sudo ip netns
>>>>> exec
>>>>> >> <ns> ssh -i keyfile_path ..."
>>>>> >> I guess ssh/scp are getting sudo priviledges in this case, so I
>>>>> wonder,
>>>>> >> what issues could be experienced here.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> 4. Keypair injection not working
>>>>> >> We also has hit this issue several times without stable repro, e.g.
>>>>> >> sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't.
>>>>> >> Currently it's our primary concern, which however could be solved by
>>>>> >> injecting keys into the image manually.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> As an alternative we tried to use pexpect library to access VM via
>>>>> >> login/password in pseudo-interactive mode but later decided that
>>>>> using key
>>>>> >> pairs is a more reliable way to access VM.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> 5. Security groups
>>>>> >> As far as I uderstood the concern - it's possible that security
>>>>> group that
>>>>> >> agent is using to access balancer VM could prohibit icmp packets
>>>>> that we use
>>>>> >> for liveliness check.
>>>>> >> So it was changed to netcat making probe on 22 port.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Latest code with all these fixes was just posted on review (HAProxy
>>>>> >> driver) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20985/
>>>>>
>>>>> This is true if the management traffic between agents/load balancer
>>>>> VMs goes over tenant network.
>>>>> Ideally I would avoid this situation in the first place, but this is
>>>>> probably cumbersome with the VM approach.
>>>>> Looking for a probe on port 22 will tell you if the port is closed or
>>>>> not. What would be the behaviour is the port is unreachable?
>>>>>
>>>>> The 'default' security group, which is applied to every single VMs,
>>>>> regardless of the nature of the network, does not allow SSH traffic.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Thanks,
>>>>> >> Eugene.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>> >> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>> >> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Regards,
>>>>> > ----------------------------------------------
>>>>> > Trinath Somanchi,
>>>>> > +91 9866 235 130
>>>>> >
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> ----------------------------------------------
>>> Trinath Somanchi,
>>> +91 9866 235 130
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> Dan Wendlandt
>> Nicira, Inc: www.nicira.com
>> twitter: danwendlandt
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> ----------------------------------------------
> Trinath Somanchi,
> +91 9866 235 130
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dan Wendlandt
Nicira, Inc: www.nicira.com
twitter: danwendlandt
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130220/6a30fe48/attachment.html>