Re: [openstack-dev] how to set default security group rules?

This isn't about the operating system of the instance or even the host. It's the behavior of the Neutron API WRT what traffic will be filtered by the default security group. If we go down this route, users will have to expect effectively random sets of security group rules from cloud to cloud and

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Allocating Complex Resources

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017, Dan Smith wrote: In other words, I would expect to be able to explain the purpose of the scheduler as "applies nova-specific logic to the generic resources that placement says are _valid_, with the goal of determining which one is _best_". This sounds great as an

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Allocating Complex Resources

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017, Jay Pipes wrote: Sorry, been in a three-hour meeting. Comments inline... Thanks for getting to this, it's very helpful to me. * Part of the reason for having nested resource providers is because it can allow affinity/anti-affinity below the compute node (e.g.,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Allocating Complex Resources

>> b) a compute node could very well have both local disk and shared >> disk. how would the placement API know which one to pick? This is a >> sorting/weighing decision and thus is something the scheduler is >> responsible for. > I remember having this discussion, and we concluded that a >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] pike m2 has been released

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: > Hmm, I was expecting an instack-undercloud release as part of m2. Is there > a reason we didn't do that? You just released a new tag: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471066/ with a new release model, why would we

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Allocating Complex Resources

On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:35 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: >> We can declare that allocating for shared disk is fairly deterministic >> if we assume that any given compute node is only associated with one >> shared disk provider. > > a) we can't assume that > b) a compute node could very

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Allocating Complex Resources

Sorry, been in a three-hour meeting. Comments inline... On 06/06/2017 10:56 AM, Chris Dent wrote: On Mon, 5 Jun 2017, Ed Leafe wrote: One proposal is to essentially use the same logic in placement that was used to include that host in those matching the requirements. In other words, when it

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][barbican][congress][designate][neutron][zaqar] missing pike-2 milestone releases

On 9 June 2017 at 06:36, Doug Hellmann wrote: > We have several projects with deliverables following the > cycle-with-milestones release model without pike 2 releases. Please > check the list below and prepare those release requests as soon as > possible. Remember that

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] etcd3 as base service - update

On 06/09/2017 11:12 AM, Lance Bragstad wrote: I should have clarified. The idea was to put the keys used to encrypt and decrypt the tokens in etcd so that synchronizing the repository across a cluster for keystone nodes is easier for operators (but not without other operator pain as Kevin

[openstack-dev] [tc][qa][all]Potential New Interoperability Programs: The Current Thinking

Hi Everyone, Happy Friday! There have been a number of discussions (at the PTG, at OpenStack Summit, in Interop WG and Board of Directors meetings, etc) over the past several months about the possibility of creating new interoperability programs in addition to the existing OpenStack Powered

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][nova] Goodbye^W See you later

... No words can express, will try to keep in touch, and congratulations on your new adventure sir! Continue to be a great influence and valued member of your new team. On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 7:45 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > Hey friends, > > I've been mostly missing

[openstack-dev] [heat] Making stack outputs static

History lesson: a long, long time ago we made a very big mistake. We treated stack outputs as things that would be resolved dynamically when you requested them, instead of having values fixed at the time the template was created or updated. This makes performance of reading outputs slow,

Re: [openstack-dev] swift3 Plugin Development

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 10:37:15 +0530 Niels de Vos wrote: > > > we are looking for S3 plugin with ACLS so that we can integrate gluster > > > with that. > > > > Did you look into porting Ceph RGW on top of Gluster? > > This is one of the longer term options that we have under

Re: [openstack-dev] [forum] Future of Stackalytics

On June 8, 2017 at 07:20:23, Jeremy Stanley (fu...@yuggoth.org) wrote: > > On 2017-06-07 16:36:45 > > -0700(http://airmail.calendar/2017-06-07%2016:36:45%20PDT) > (-0700), Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: > [...] > > one of config files is 30KL due to much user information and that > > makes the

Re: [openstack-dev] Action Items WG Chairs: Requesting your input to a cross Working Group session

Per the request below the most widely supported time for a cross Working Group status meeting seems to be Wednesdays at 0500 UTC. We will bring this to the UC meeting on Monday. Proposal is that the first UC meeting with WG status would be 6/21 Wednesday 0500 UTC (Tuesday Late Evening US

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment] [oslo] [ansible] [tripleo] [kolla] [helm] Configuration management with etcd / confd

Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2017-06-09 16:52:25 +: > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:30 AM Britt Houser (bhouser) > wrote: > > > How does confd run inside the container? Does this mean we’d need some > > kind of systemd in every container which would spawn both

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment] [oslo] [ansible] [tripleo] [kolla] [helm] Configuration management with etcd / confd

On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 04:52:25PM +, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:30 AM Britt Houser (bhouser) > wrote: > > > How does confd run inside the container? Does this mean we’d need some > > kind of systemd in every container which would spawn both confd

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][mistral][tripleo][horizon][nova][releases] release models for projects tracked in global-requirements.txt

Excerpts from Alex Schultz's message of 2017-06-09 10:54:16 -0600: > I ran into a case where I wanted to add python-tripleoclient to > test-requirements for tripleo-heat-templates but it's not in the > global requirements. In looking into adding this, I noticed that > python-tripleoclient and

[openstack-dev] [all][tc][glance] Glance needs help, it's getting critical

(sorry if duplicate, having troubles with email) Hi Team, I've been working a bit with the Glance team and trying to help where I can and I can't but be worried about the critical status of the Glance team. Unfortunately, the number of participants in the Glance team has been reduced a lot

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][nova] Goodbye^W See you later

On 06/08/2017 07:45 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Hey friends, I've been mostly missing for the past six weeks while looking for a new job, so maybe you've forgotten me already, maybe not. I'm happy to tell you I've found one that I think is a great opportunity for me. But, I'm sad to tell you

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][mistral][tripleo][horizon][nova][releases] release models for projects tracked in global-requirements.txt

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Matthew Thode > wrote: >> We have a problem in requirements that projects that don't have the >> cycle-with-intermediary release model (most of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment] [oslo] [ansible] [tripleo] [kolla] [helm] Configuration management with etcd / confd

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:30 AM Britt Houser (bhouser) wrote: > How does confd run inside the container? Does this mean we’d need some > kind of systemd in every container which would spawn both confd and the > real service? That seems like a very large architectural change.

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment] [oslo] [ansible] [tripleo] [kolla] [helm] Configuration management with etcd / confd

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 8:07 AM Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2017-06-08 22:28:05 +: > > > Unless I'm missing something, to use confd with an OpenStack deployment > on > > k8s, we'll have to do something like this: > > > > * Deploy

[openstack-dev] Call For Proposals: KVM Forum 2017 [Submission deadline: 15-JUN-2017]

KVM Forum 2017: Call For Participation October 25-27, 2017 - Hilton Prague - Prague, Czech Republic (All submissions must be received before midnight June 15, 2017) =

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Allocating Complex Resources

>> My current feeling is that we got ourselves into our existing mess >> of ugly, convoluted code when we tried to add these complex >> relationships into the resource tracker and the scheduler. We set >> out to create the placement engine to bring some sanity back to how >> we think about things

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] etcd3 as base service - update

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Lance Bragstad's message of 2017-06-08 16:10:00 -0500: > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Emilien Macchi > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Lance Bragstad

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Call for check: is your project ready for pylint 1.7.1?

Excerpts from Akihiro Motoki's message of 2017-06-09 03:53:34 +0900: > Hi all, > > Is your project ready for pylint 1.7.1? > If you use pylint in your pep8 job, it is worth checked. > > Our current version of pylint is 1.4.5 but it is not safe in python 3.5. > The global-requirements update was

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment] [oslo] [ansible] [tripleo] [kolla] [helm] Configuration management with etcd / confd

How does confd run inside the container? Does this mean we’d need some kind of systemd in every container which would spawn both confd and the real service? That seems like a very large architectural change. But maybe I’m misunderstanding it. Thx, britt On 6/9/17, 9:04 AM, "Doug Hellmann"

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] etcd3 as base service - update

Excerpts from Lance Bragstad's message of 2017-06-08 16:10:00 -0500: > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Lance Bragstad > > wrote: > > > After digging into etcd a bit, one place this might be help

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Call for check: is your project ready for pylint 1.7.1?

Thanks, Sean. I will heartily second that request/proposal. -amrith -amrith -- Amrith Kumar Phone: +1-978-563-9590 On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 06/08/2017 02:53 PM, Akihiro Motoki wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Is your project ready for pylint 1.7.1?

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Call for check: is your project ready for pylint 1.7.1?

On 06/08/2017 02:53 PM, Akihiro Motoki wrote: > Hi all, > > Is your project ready for pylint 1.7.1? > If you use pylint in your pep8 job, it is worth checked. > > Our current version of pylint is 1.4.5 but it is not safe in python 3.5. > The global-requirements update was merged once [1], >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Call for check: is your project ready for pylint 1.7.1?

​Is there a driving reason why this has to be done in the Pike cycle? The requirements freeze is coincident with Pike-3 and your two week deadline puts it pretty close to that date so I'm going to assume that you will have to make this change before p3. Trove is another of the projects that went

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

I had initially looked into this for the 3PAR drivers when we initially were working on the target driver code. The problem I found was, it would take a fair amount of time to refactor the code, with marginal benefit. Yes, the design is better, but I couldn't justify the refactoring time, effort

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][glance][barbican][telemetry][keystone][designate][congress][magnum][searchlight][swift][tacker] unreleased libraries

thanks Doug, Here is ceilometerclient release: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472736/ Cheers, Hanxi Liu On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Spyros Trigazis wrote: > Thanks for the reminder. > > python-magnumclient https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472718/ > >

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Role updates

Hey folks, I wanted to bring to your attention that we've merged the change[0] to add a basic set of roles that can be combined to create your own roles_data.yaml as needed. With this change the roles_data.yaml and roles_data_undercloud.yaml files in THT should not be changed by hand. Instead if

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] etcd3 as base service - update

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Mike Bayer wrote: > > > On 06/08/2017 01:34 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: > >> After digging into etcd a bit, one place this might be help deployer >> experience would be the handling of fernet keys for token encryption in >> keystone. Currently,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] etcd3 as base service - update

On 09/06/17 10:57 AM, Mike Bayer wrote: > Interesting, I had the mis-conception that "fernet" keys no longer > required any server-side storage (how is "kept-on-disk" now > implemented?) . We've had continuous issues with the pre-fernet > Keystone tokens filling up databases, even when

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][glance][barbican][telemetry][keystone][designate][congress][magnum][searchlight][swift][tacker] unreleased libraries

Thanks for the reminder. python-magnumclient https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472718/ Cheers, Spyros On 9 June 2017 at 16:39, Doug Hellmann wrote: > We have several teams with library deliverables that haven't seen > any releases at all yet this cycle. Please review the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] pike m2 has been released

Hmm, I was expecting an instack-undercloud release as part of m2. Is there a reason we didn't do that? On 06/08/2017 03:47 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: We have a new release of TripleO, pike milestone 2. All bugs targeted on Pike-2 have been moved into Pike-3. I'll take care of moving the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] etcd3 as base service - update

On 06/08/2017 04:24 PM, Julien Danjou wrote: On Thu, Jun 08 2017, Mike Bayer wrote: So I wouldn't be surprised if new / existing openstack applications express some gravitational pull towards using it as their own datastore as well. I'll be trying to hang onto the etcd3 track as much as

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][glance][barbican][telemetry][keystone][designate][congress][magnum][searchlight][swift][tacker] unreleased libraries

Just pushed a release for pycadf as well [1]. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472717/ On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Lance Bragstad wrote: > We have a review in flight to release python-keystoneclient [0]. Thanks > for the reminder! > > [0]

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] etcd3 as base service - update

On 06/08/2017 01:34 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: After digging into etcd a bit, one place this might be help deployer experience would be the handling of fernet keys for token encryption in keystone. Currently, all keys used to encrypt and decrypt tokens are kept on disk for each keystone node

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Allocating Complex Resources

On 06/05/2017 05:22 PM, Ed Leafe wrote: Another proposal involved a change to how placement responds to the scheduler. Instead of just returning the UUIDs of the compute nodes that satisfy the required resources, it would include a whole bunch of additional information in a structured response.

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Containers Deep Dive - 15th June

Hello, as discussed previously on the list and at the weekly meeting, we'll do a deep dive about containers. The time: Thursday 15th June, 14:00 UTC (the usual time) Link for attending will be at the deep dives etherpad [1], preliminary agenda is in another etherpad [2], and i hope i'll be

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][glance][barbican][telemetry][keystone][designate][congress][magnum][searchlight][swift][tacker] unreleased libraries

We have a review in flight to release python-keystoneclient [0]. Thanks for the reminder! [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472667/ On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > We have several teams with library deliverables that haven't seen > any releases

[openstack-dev] [release][glance][barbican][telemetry][keystone][designate][congress][magnum][searchlight][swift][tacker] unreleased libraries

We have several teams with library deliverables that haven't seen any releases at all yet this cycle. Please review the list below, and if there are changes on master since the last release prepare a release request. Remember that because of the way our CI system works, patches that land in

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ironic] Hardware provisioning testing for Ocata

This is great information Justin, thanks for sharing. It will prove useful as we scale up our ironic deployments. It seems to me that a reference configuration of ironic would be a useful resource for many people. Some key decisions affecting scalability and performance may at first seem

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squad Meeting Summary (week 23) - images, devmode and the RDO Cloud

If the topics below interest you and you want to contribute to the discussion, feel free to join the next meeting: Time: Thursdays, 14:30-15:30 UTC Place: https://bluejeans.com/4113567798/ Full minutes: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ci-squad-meeting We had a packed agenda and

[openstack-dev] [sahara] Pike 2 released

Hey Saharans and interested parties, Just announcing that Sahara Pike 2 was released yesterday and I will be taking care of bugs and blueprints targeted to P2 and moving them to P3. This release was a bit crazy, thanks for everyone that helped us get things together before the deadline. Let's

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] etcd3 as base service - update

On 09/06/17 12:37 AM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > My thinking is that people should look over https://raft.github.io/ or > http://thesecretlivesofdata.com/raft/ (or both or others...) > this was really useful. thanks for this! love how they described it so simply with visuals. spend a few minutes

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Install Kubernetes in the overcloud using TripleO

Do you intend to support a scenario where overcloud nodes are bare metal? On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote: > Hey y'all, > > Just wanted to give an updated on the work around tripleo+kubernetes. This > is > still far in the future but as we move tripleo

[openstack-dev] [release][barbican][congress][designate][neutron][zaqar] missing pike-2 milestone releases

We have several projects with deliverables following the cycle-with-milestones release model without pike 2 releases. Please check the list below and prepare those release requests as soon as possible. Remember that this milestone is date-based, not feature-based, so unless your gate is completely

Re: [openstack-dev] Swift3 Plugin Development

On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 17:06 +0530, Venkata R Edara wrote: > Hello, > > we  have storage product called Gluster which is file storage system, > we  > are looking to support S3 APIs for it. Hello Venkata, Did you consider using the S3 Server project [1] to implement this functionality? S3 Server

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [deployment] [oslo] [ansible] [tripleo] [kolla] [helm] Configuration management with etcd / confd

Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2017-06-07 14:00:38 -0400: > Excerpts from Emilien Macchi's message of 2017-06-07 16:42:13 +0200: > > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 7, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Emilien Macchi

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][keystone] Can we get a new python-keystoneclient release?

Hi, I have proposed one to the new release: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/472667/ Best Regards, Hanxi Liu On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Javier Pena wrote: > Hi, > > The latest python-keystoneclient release (3.10.0) dates back to Ocata, and > it can't be properly

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment] [oslo] [ansible] [tripleo] [kolla] [helm] Configuration management with etcd / confd

Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2017-06-08 22:28:05 +: > Unless I'm missing something, to use confd with an OpenStack deployment on > k8s, we'll have to do something like this: > > * Deploy confd in every node where we may want to run a pod (basically > wvery node) Oh, no, no.

Re: [openstack-dev] how to set default security group rules?

On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 05:20:03AM -0700, Kevin Benton wrote: > This was an intentional decision. One of the goals of OpenStack is to > provide consistency across different clouds and configurable defaults for > new tenants default rules hurts consistency. > > If I write a script to boot up a

[openstack-dev] [nova] placement/resource providers update 26

Placement update 26. First a note from your editor: This will be the last of these I do until July 7th. I'll be taking a break from sometime next week until July. If someone else would like to do the three updates on the state of placement and resource providers in that window that would be

Re: [openstack-dev] how to set default security group rules?

This was an intentional decision. One of the goals of OpenStack is to provide consistency across different clouds and configurable defaults for new tenants default rules hurts consistency. If I write a script to boot up a workload on one OpenStack cloud that allows everything by default and it

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] [cinder] [neutron] [ironic] - Global Request ID progress - update 6/9

A bunch more work landed this week, here is where we stand: STATUS oslo.context / oslo.middleware - DONE devstack logging additional global_request_id - DONE cinder: DONE - client supports global_request_id - DONE - call Nova & Glance with global_request_id - DONE neutron: BLOCKED - client

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ironic] Hardware provisioning testing for Ocata

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 5:25 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > This number of "300", does it come from your testing or from other sources? > If the former, which driver were you using? What exactly problems have you > seen approaching this number? I haven't encountered this issue

[openstack-dev]   [neutron][nova]   sriov bond

Hi all: In the NFV field,many scenes need L2 redundant for SR-IOV.But currently nova or neutron solution for L2 bond is usually configured multiple neutron ports and allocate different VFs on different physical network adapters to implement this, like this bp.

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][l2gw] OVS code currently broken

Hi Kevin, There was already a bug filed about the Tempest plugin: https://bugs.launchpad.net/networking-l2gw/+bug/1692529 Thanks On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > Can you file a bug against Neutron and reference it here? > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 8:28

[openstack-dev] [release][keystone] Can we get a new python-keystoneclient release?

Hi, The latest python-keystoneclient release (3.10.0) dates back to Ocata, and it can't be properly packaged in Pike because it fails to run unit tests, since [1] is required. Can we get a new release? Thanks, Javier [1] -

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Install Kubernetes in the overcloud using TripleO

On 08.06.2017 18:36, Flavio Percoco wrote: > Hey y'all, > > Just wanted to give an updated on the work around tripleo+kubernetes. > This is > still far in the future but as we move tripleo to containers using > docker-cmd, > we're also working on the final goal, which is to have it run these >

Re: [openstack-dev] how to set default security group rules?

I believe that there are no features impelemented in neutron that allows changing the rules for the default security group. I am also interested in seeing such a feature implemented. I see only this blueprint :

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ironic] Hardware provisioning testing for Ocata

On 06/08/2017 02:21 PM, Justin Kilpatrick wrote: Morning everyone, I've been working on a performance testing tool for TripleO hardware provisioning operations off and on for about a year now and I've been using it to try and collect more detailed data about how TripleO performs in scale and

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] openstack-ubuntu-testing-bot -- please turn off

Hi Ian On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 at 07:57 Ian Wienand wrote: > Hi, > > If you know of someone in control of whatever is trying to use this > account, running on 91.189.91.27 (a canonical IP), can you please turn > it off. It's in a tight loop failing to connect to gerrit, which >

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][nova] Goodbye^W See you later

Sigh. Jim, you're on of the brightest people I've ever worked with. The project will definitely have hard time recovering from the loss, and so will I personally. Thank you for your great patches, discussions, for your leadership during your times as a PTL. I heartily wish you the very best

[openstack-dev] Tasks update of Mogan Project

Hi, We are glad to present this week's tasks update of Mogan. Essential Priorities 1.Node aggregates (liudong, zhangyang, zhenguo) --- blueprint: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mogan/+spec/node-aggregate

Re: [openstack-dev] how to set default security group rules?

The following is the code, there is no configuration item to configure the default rules for ethertype in ext_sg.sg_supported_ethertypes: if default_sg: # Allow intercommunication ingress_rule = sg_models.SecurityGroupRule(

[openstack-dev] how to set default security group rules?

I see the neutron code, which added the default rules to write very rigid, only for ipv4 ipv6 plus two rules. What if I want to customize the default rules? __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

[openstack-dev] [infra] openstack-ubuntu-testing-bot -- please turn off

Hi, If you know of someone in control of whatever is trying to use this account, running on 91.189.91.27 (a canonical IP), can you please turn it off. It's in a tight loop failing to connect to gerrit, which probably isn't good for either end :) -i