[Openstack] Connecting to Keystone from a different port using HAproxy

Aaron Knister aaron.knister at gmail.com
Thu Jun 13 14:19:16 UTC 2013


Hi Sam

I don't have a fix but I actually had the same problem but for a different reason.  I was trying to run keystone via apache and listen on multiple ports to support regular auth and external auth. I couldn't figure out how to map additional ports within keytstone. I'm very much interested in the solution here. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 13, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Samuel Winchenbach <swinchen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> I am attempting to set up a high availability openstack cluster.  Currently, using pacemaker, I create a Virtual IP for all the highly available service, launch haproxy to proxy all the requests and clone keystone to all the nodes.   The idea being that the requests come into haproxy and are load balanced across all the nodes.
> 
> 
> To do this I have keystone listen on 26000 for admin, and 26001 for public.  haproxy listens on 35357 and 5000 respectively (these ports are bound to the VIP).  The problem with setup is that my log is filling (MB/min) with this warning:
> 
> 2013-06-13 09:20:18     INFO [access] 127.0.0.1 - - [13/Jun/2013:13:20:18 +0000] "GET http://10.80.255.1:35357/v2.0/users HTTP/1.0" 200 915
> 2013-06-13 09:20:18  WARNING [keystone.contrib.stats.core] Unable to resolve API as either public or admin: 10.80.255.1:35357
> ...
> ...
> 
> where 10.80.255.1 is my VIP for highly available services.   I traced down that module and added a few lines of code for debugging and it turns out that if checks to see if the incoming connection matches a port in the config file.  In my case it does not.
> 
> I can not just bind keystone to the internal ip and leave the port as their defaults because the way pacemaker checks to see if services are alive is by sending requests to service it is monitoring, and I do not want to send requests to the VIP because any instance of keystone could respond.   Basically I would I have to write a pacemaker rule for each node and it would become messy quite quickly.
> 
> Does anyone see something I could do differently, or a fix for my current situation?  
> 
> Thanks,
> Sam
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to     : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20130613/139bf82e/attachment.html>


More information about the Openstack mailing list