[ops][nova][designate] Does anyone rely on fully-qualified instance names?

Jeremy Stanley fungi at yuggoth.org
Mon Nov 30 20:12:38 UTC 2020

On 2020-11-30 19:50:22 +0000 (+0000), Sean Mooney wrote:
> we can generate the metadat form teh new fqdn filed. if designate
> is enabled then the fqdn will be taken form the port info. in the
> metadata we will store the instance.hostname which will never be
> an fqdn in all local hostname keys. we can store teh fqdn in the
> public_hostname key in the ec2 metadata and in a new fqdn filed.
> this will make the values consitent and useful. with the new
> microversion we will nolonger transform the hostname except for
> multi-create where it will be used as a template i.e. <server
> name>-<vm index> TBD if the new micorversion will continue to
> transform unicode hostname to server-<uuid> or allow them out of
> scope for now.

If I'm understanding, this proposes to separate the instance name
from the hostname, allowing them to be configured independently in
API calls. If so, I agree this sounds like the sanest eventual
behavior, even if getting there will require microversion bumps and
non-backportable improvements. That would allow me to continue
setting whatever instance names make sense for me, and I can still
ignore the metadata's hostname content, but could also even start
using it if it becomes a reliable way to set one across providers
(in the far distant future when they've all upgraded).
Jeremy Stanley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20201130/c5491ba6/attachment.sig>

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list