Open Stack

I agree. Configuration with memcache made by Fuel now has issues which badly 
affect overall OpenStack experience.

On Monday 27 July 2015 14:34:59 Vladimir Kuklin wrote:
> Folks
> 
> We saw several High issues with how keystone manages regular memcached
> tokens. I know, this is not the perfect time as you already decided to push
> it from 7.0, but I would reconsider declaring it as FFE as it affects HA
> and UX poorly. If we can enable tokens simply by altering configuration,
> let's do it. I see commit for this feature is pretty trivial.
> 
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Mike Scherbakov <mscherbakov at mirantis.com>
> 
> wrote:
> > Fuel Library team, I expect your immediate reply here.
> > 
> > I'd like upgrades team to take a look at this one, as well as at the one
> > which moves Keystone under Apache, in order to check that there are no
> > issues here.
> > 
> > -1 from me for this time in the cycle. I'm concerned about:
> >    1. I don't see any reference to blueprint or bug which explains (with
> >    measurements) why we need this change in reference architecture, and
> >    what
> >    are the thoughts about it in puppet-openstack, and OpenStack Keystone.
> >    We
> >    need to get datapoints, and point to them. Just knowing that Keystone
> >    team
> >    implemented support for it doesn't yet mean that we need to rush in
> >    enabling this.
> >    2. It is quite noticeable change, not a simple enhancement. I reviewed
> >    the patch, there are questions raised.
> >    3. It doesn't pass CI, and I don't have information on risks
> >    associated, and additional effort required to get this done (how long
> >    would
> >    it take to get it done)
> >    4. This feature increases complexity of reference architecture. Now
> >    I'd like every complexity increase to be optional. I have feedback from
> >    the
> >    field, that our prescriptive architecture just doesn't fit users'
> >    needs,
> >    and it is so painful to decouple then what is needed vs what is not.
> >    Let's
> >    start extending stuff with an easy switch, being propagated from Fuel
> >    Settings. Is it possible to do? How complex would it be?
> > 
> > If we get answers for all of this, and decide that we still want the
> > feature, then it would be great to have it. I just don't feel that it's
> > right timing anymore - we entered FF.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:53 AM Alexander Makarov <amakarov at mirantis.com>
> > 
> > wrote:
> >> Colleagues,
> >> 
> >> I would like to request an exception from the Feature Freeze for Fernet
> >> tokens support added to the fuel-library in the following CR:
> >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/201029/
> >> 
> >> Keystone part of the feature is implemented in the upstream and the
> >> change impacts setup configuration only.
> >> 
> >> Please, respond if you have any questions or concerns related to this
> >> request.
> >> 
> >> Thanks in advance.
> >> 
> >> --
> >> Kind Regards,
> >> Alexander Makarov,
> >> Senior Software Developer,
> >> 
> >> Mirantis, Inc.
> >> 35b/3, Vorontsovskaya St., 109147, Moscow, Russia
> >> 
> >> Tel.: +7 (495) 640-49-04
> >> Tel.: +7 (926) 204-50-60
> >> 
> >> Skype: MAKAPOB.AJIEKCAHDP
> >> 
> >> _________________________________________________________________________
> >> _
> >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> >> Unsubscribe:
> >> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> > 
> > --
> > Mike Scherbakov
> > #mihgen
> > 
> > __________________________________________________________________________
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

-- 
Best regards,
Boris Bobrov