Hello Ifat,

 

I'll update the BP soon. : )


Thank you.

 

Best regards,

Minwook.

 

From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com] 
Sent: Sunday, April 8, 2018 6:01 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hi Minwook,

 

Sounds like a good idea :)

 

Thanks,

Ifat

 

From: MinWookKim <delightw...@ssu.ac.kr <mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr> >
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >
Date: Friday, 6 April 2018 at 12:07
To: "'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Ifat,

 

If possible, could i write a blueprint based on what we discussed?
(architecture, specs)

 

After checking the blueprint, it would be better to proceed with specific
updates on the various issues.

what do you think?

 

Thanks.

 

Best regards,

Minwook.

From: MinWookKim [mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr] 
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 10:53 AM
To: 'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'
Subject: RE: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Ifat,

 

Thanks for the good comments.

 

It was very helpful.

 

As you said, I tested for std.ssh, and I was able to get much better
results.

 

I am confident that this is what I want.

 

We can use std.ssh to provide convenience to users with a much more
efficient way to configure shell scripts / monitoring agent automation(for
Zabbix history,etc) / other commands.

 

In addition, std_actions.py contained a number of features that could be
used for this proposal (such as HTTP).

 

So if we actively use and utilize the actions in std_actions.py, we might
be able to construct neat code without the duplicate functionality that you
worried about.

 

It has been a great help.

 

In addition, I also agree that Vitrage action is required for Mistral.

 

If possible, I might be able to do that in the future.(ASAP)

 

Thank you.

 

Best regards,

Minwook.

 

From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 4:21 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hi Minwook,

 

I discussed this issue with a Mistral contributor. 

Mistral has a long list of actions that can be used. Specifically, you can
use the std.ssh action to execute shell scripts.

 

Some useful commands:

 

mistral action-list

mistral action-get <UUID of the std.ssh action>

 

I’m not sure about the output of the std.ssh, and whether you can get it
from the action. I suggest you try it and see how it works.

The action is implemented here:
https://github.com/openstack/mistral/blob/master/mistral/actions/std_actions
.py 

 

If std.ssh does not suit your needs, you also have an option to implement
and run your own action in Mistral (either as an ssh action or as a python
code). 

And BTW, it is not related to your current use case, but we can also add
Vitrage actions to Mistral, so the user can access Vitrage information (get
topology, get alarms) from Mistral workflows. 

 

Best regards,

Ifat

 

 

From: MinWookKim <delightw...@ssu.ac.kr <mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr> >
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >
Date: Tuesday, 3 April 2018 at 15:19
To: "'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Ifat,

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

Your comments have been a great help to the proposal.  (sorry, I did not
think we could use Mistral).

 

If we use the Mistral workflow for the proposal, we can get better results
(we can get good results on performance and code conciseness).

 

Also, if we use the Mistral workflow, we do not need to write any
unnecessary code.

 

Since I don't know about mistral yet, I think it would be better to do the
most efficient design including mistral after grasping it.

 

If we run a check through a Mistral workflow, how about providing users
with a choice of tools that have the capability to perform checks?

 

We can get the results of the check through the Mistral and tools, but I
think we need the least functionality to manage them. What do you think?

 

I attached a picture of the actual UI that I simply implemented. I hope it
helps you understand. (The parameter and content have no meaning and are a
simple example.) : )

 

Thanks.

 

Best regards,

Minwook.

 

From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 8:31 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hi Minwook,

 

Thanks for the explanation, I understand the reasons for not running these
checks on a regular basis in Zabbix or other monitoring tools. It makes
sense. However, I don’t want to re-invent the wheel and add to Vitrage
functionality that already exists in other projects. 

 

How about using Mistral for the purpose of manually running these extra
checks? If you prepare the script/agent in advance, as well as the Mistral
workflow, I believe that Mistral can successfully execute the check and
return the results. I’m not so sure about the UI part, we will have to
figure out how and where the user can see the output. But it will save a lot
of effort around managing the checks, running a new service, supporting a
new API, etc.

 

What do you think?

Ifat

 

 

From: MinWookKim <delightw...@ssu.ac.kr <mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr> >
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: Tuesday, 3 April 2018 at 5:36
To: "'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Ifat, 

 

I also thought about several scenarios that use monitoring tools like
Zabbix, Nagios, and Prometheus.

 

But there are some limitations, so we have to think about it.

 

We also need to think about targets, scope, and so on.

 

The reason I do not think of tools like Zabbix, Nagios, and Prometheus as a
tool to run checks is because we need to configure an agent or an exporter.

 

I think it is not hard to configure an agent for monitoring objects such as
a physical host.

 

But the scope of the idea I think involves the VM's interior. 

 

Therefore, configuring the agent automatically inside the VM may not be
easy. (although we can use parameters like user-data)

 

If we exclude VM internal checks from scope, we can simply perform a check
via Zabbix. (Like Zabbix's remote command, history)

 

On the other hand, if we include the inside of a VM in a scope, and
configure each of them, we have a rather constant overhead.

 

The check service may incur temporary overhead, but the agent configuration
can cause constant overhead.

 

And Zabbix history can be another task for Vitrage.

 

If we configure the agents themselves and exclude the VM's internal checks,
we can provide functionality with simple code.

 

how is it?

 

Thank you.

 

Best regards,

Minwook.

From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 2, 2018 10:22 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hi Minwook,

 

Thinking about it again, writing a new service for these checks might be an
unnecessary overhead. Have you considered using an existing tool, like
Zabbix, for running such checks? If you use Zabbix, you can define new
triggers that run the new checks, and whenever needed the user can ask to
open Zabbix and show the relevant metrics. The format will not be exactly
the same as in your example, but it will save a lot of work and spare you
the need to write and manage a new service. 

 

Some technical details: 

 

*         The current information that Vitrage stores is not enough for
opening the right Zabbix page. We will need to keep a little more data, like
the item id, on the alarm vertex. But can be done easily. 

*         A relevant Zabbix API is history.get [1]

*         If you are not using Zabbix, I assume that other monitoring tools
have similar capabilities

 

What do you think? Do you think it can work with your scenario?

Or do you see a benefit to the user is viewing the data in the format that
you suggested?

 

 

[1]
<https://www.zabbix.com/documentation/3.0/manual/api/reference/history/get>
https://www.zabbix.com/documentation/3.0/manual/api/reference/history/get

 

Thanks,

Ifat

 

 

From: MinWookKim < <mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr> delightw...@ssu.ac.kr>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: Monday, 2 April 2018 at 4:51
To: "'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'" <
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Ifat,

 

Thank you for the reply. :)

 

It is my opinion only, so if I'm wrong, we can change the implementation
part at any time. (Even if it differs from my initial intention)

 

The same security issues arise as you say. But now Vitrage does not call
external APIs.

 

The Vitrage-dashboard uses Vitrageclient libraries for Topology, Alarms,
and RCA requests to Vitrage.

 

So if we add an API, it will have the following flow.

 

Vitrage-dashboard requests checks using the Vitrageclient library. ->
Vitrage receives the API.

 

-> api / controllers / v1 / checks.py is called. -> checks service is
called.

 

In accordance with the above flow, passing through the Vitrage API is the
purpose of data passing and function calls. 

 

I think Vitrage does not need to call external APIs.

 

If you do not want to go through the Vitrage API, we need to create a
function for the check action in the Vitrage-dashboard, and write code to
call the function.

 

If I think wrong, please tell me anytime. :)

 

Thank you.

 

Best regards,

Minwook.

 

From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [ <mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com>
mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com] 
Sent: Sunday, April 1, 2018 3:40 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hi Minwook,

 

I understand your concern about the security issue. 

But how would that be different if the API call is passed through Vitrage
API? The authentication from vitrage-dashboard to vitrage API will work, but
then Vitrage will call an external API and you’ll have the same security
issue, right? I don’t understand what is the difference between calling the
external component from vitrage-dashboard and calling it from vitrage.

 

Best regards,

Ifat.

 

From: MinWookKim < <mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr> delightw...@ssu.ac.kr>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: Thursday, 29 March 2018 at 14:51
To: "'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'" <
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Ifat,

 

Thanks for your reply.  : )

I wrote my opinion on your comment.

 

Why do you think the request should pass through the Vitrage API? Why can’t
vitrage-dashboard call the check component directly?

 

Authentication issues:

I think the check component is a separate component based on the API.

 

In my opinion, if the check component has a separate api address from the
vitrage to receive requests from the Vitrage-dashboard, 

the Vitrage-dashboard needs to know the api address for the check
component.

 

This can result in a request / response situation open to anyone,
regardless of the authentication supported 

by openstack between the Vitrage-dashboard and the request / response
procedure of check component.

 

This is possible not only through the Vitrage-dashboard, but also with
simple commands such as curl. 

(I think it is unnecessary to implement a separate authentication system
for the check component.)

 

This problem may occur if someone knows the api address for the check
component, 

which can cause the host and VM to execute system commands.

 

what should happen if the user closes the check window before the checks
are over? I assume that the checks will finish, but the user won’t be able
to see the results?

 

If the window is closed before the check is finished, the user can not
check the result.

 

To solve this problem, I think that temporarily saving a list of recent
results is also a solution.

 

By storing temporary lists (for example, up to 10), the user can see the
previous results and think that it is also possible to empty the list by the
user.

 

how is it?

 

Thank you.

 

Best Regrads,

Minwook.

 

From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [ <mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com>
mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 8:07 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hi Minwook,

 

Why do you think the request should pass through the Vitrage API? Why can’t
vitrage-dashboard call the check component directly?

 

And another question: what should happen if the user closes the check
window before the checks are over? I assume that the checks will finish, but
the user won’t be able to see the results?

 

Thanks,

Ifat.

 

From: MinWookKim < <mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr> delightw...@ssu.ac.kr>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: Thursday, 29 March 2018 at 10:25
To: "'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'" <
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Ifat and Vitrage team.

 

I would like to explain more about the implementation part of the mail I
sent last time.

 

The flow is as follows.

 

Vitrage-dashboard (action-list-panel) -> Vitrage-api -> check component

 

The last time I mentioned it as api-handler, it would be better to call the
check component directly from Vitarge-api without having to use it.

 

I hope this helps you understand.

 

Thank you

 

Best Regards,

Minwook. 

 

From: MinWookKim [ <mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr>
mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 11:21 AM
To: 'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Ifat, 

 

Thanks for your reply. : )

 

This proposal is a proposal that we expect to be useful from a user
perspective.

>From a manager's point of view, we need an implementation that minimizes
the overhead incurred by the proposal.

The answers to some of your questions are:

 

&#8226  I assume that these checks will not be implemented in Vitrage, and
the results will not be stored in Vitrage, right? Vitrage role is to be a
place where it is easy and intuitive for the user to execute external
actions/checks.

 

Yes, that's right. We do not need to save it to Vitrage because we just
need to check the results. 

However, it is possible to implement the function directly in
Vitrage-dashboard separately from Vitrage like add-action-list panel, 

but it seems that it is not enough to implement all the functions. 

If you do not mind, we will have the following flow.


1. The user requests the check action from the vitrage-dashboard
(add-action-list-panel).
2. Call the check component through the vitrage's API handler.
3. The check component executes the command and returns the result.

 

Because it is my opinion only, please tell us if there is an unnecessary
part. :)

 

&#8226  Do you expect the user to click an entity, select an action to run
(e.g. ‘P2P check’), and wait by the open panel for the results? What if the
user switches to another menu before the check is done? What if the user
asks to run an additional check in parallel? What if the user wants to see
again a previous result?

 

My idea was to select the task, wait for the results in an open panel, and
then instantly see it in the panel. 

If we switch to another menu before the scan is complete, we will not be
able to see the results.
Parallel checking is a matter of fact. (This can cause excessive overhead.)
For earlier results, it may be okay to temporarily save the open panel
until we exit the panel. We can see the previous results through the
temporary saved results.

 

&#8226  Any thoughts of what component will implement those checks? Or
maybe these will be just scripts?

 

I think I implement a separate component to request it.

 

&#8226  It could be nice if, as a result of an action check, a new alarm
will be raised in Vitrage. A specific alarm with the additional details that
were found. However, it might not be trivial to implement it. We could think
about it as phase #2.

 

It is expected to be really good. It would be very useful if an
Entity-Graph generates an alarm based on the check result.

I think that part will be able to talk in detail later.

My answer is my opinions and assumptions.

If you think my implementation is wrong, or an inefficient implementation,
please do not hesitate to tell me.

 

Thanks.

 

Best Regards,

Minwook. 

From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [ <mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com>
mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 2:23 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hi Minwook,

 

I think that from a user’s perspective, these are very good ideas.

 

I have some questions regarding the UX and the implementation, since I’m
trying to think what could be the best way to execute such actions from
Vitrage.

 

*         I assume that these checks will not be implemented in Vitrage,
and the results will not be stored in Vitrage, right? Vitrage role is to be
a place where it is easy and intuitive for the user to execute external
actions/checks.

*         Do you expect the user to click an entity, select an action to
run (e.g. ‘P2P check’), and wait by the open panel for the results? What if
the user switches to another menu before the check is done? What if the user
asks to run an additional check in parallel? What if the user wants to see
again a previous result?

*         Any thoughts of what component will implement those checks? Or
maybe these will be just scripts? 

*         It could be nice if, as a result of an action check, a new alarm
will be raised in Vitrage. A specific alarm with the additional details that
were found. However, it might not be trivial to implement it. We could think
about it as phase #2.

 

Best Regards,

Ifat

 

 

From: MinWookKim < <mailto:delightw...@ssu.ac.kr> delightw...@ssu.ac.kr>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 14:45
To: " <mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org" <
<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Vitrage] New proposal for analysis.

 

Hello Vitrage team.

 

I am currently working on the Vitrage-Dashboard proposal for the ‘Add
action list panel for entity click action’.

( <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/531141/>
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/531141/)

 

I would like to make a new proposal based on the action list panel
mentioned above.

 

The new proposal is to provide multidimensional analysis capabilities in
several entities that make up the infrastructure in the entity graph.

 

Vitrage's entity-graph allows us to efficiently monitor alarms from various
monitoring tools.

 

In the current state, when there is a problem with the VM and Host, or when
we want to check the status, we need to access the console individually for
each VM and Host.

 

This situation causes unnecessary behavior when the number of VMs and hosts
increases.

 

My new suggestion is that if we have a large number of vm and host, we do
not need to directly connect to each VM, host console to enter the system
command. 

 

Instead, we can send a system command to VM and hosts in the cloud through
this proposal. It is only checking results.

 

I have written some use-cases for an efficient explanation of the function.

 

>From an implementation perspective, the goals of the proposal are:

 

1.     To execute commands without installing any Agent / Client that can
cause load on VM, Host.

2. I want to provide a simple UI so that users or administrators can get
the desired information to multiple VMs and hosts.

3. I want to be able to grasp the results at a glance.

4. I want to implement a component that can support many additional
scenarios in plug-in format.

 

I would be happy if you could comment on the proposal or ask questions.

 

Thanks.

 

Best Regards,

Minwook. 

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to