Re: [CentOS-devel] Update from CentOS PaaS SIG

Hi Sandro, Let me clarify few things as i fear there might be some confusion. Even though is going to be a lot of history provided hopefully will help everyone to understand *"why & where"* questions. The message we tried to send out with the blog post was to a) update on the current state OKD

[OKD 4.x]: first preview drop - please help out with testing and feedback

Hi folks, For those who are not following the okd working group updates or not hanging on the openshift-dev/users K8s slack channel, please be aware of the announcement sent out [1] by Clayton We would very much appreciate if folks help out testing and provide feedback. Note we haven't

Re: ANNOUNCEMENT! OKD Community Discussions Moved to okd...@googlegroups.com

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 5:30 PM James Cassell wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019, at 9:39 AM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > James, Serge, > > > > Back in July an email was sent to dev mailing list [1] and it was also > > posted on OpenShift Common agenda announcing the kic

Re: Call for Agreement: OKD WG Charter (Revised Proposal)

Thanks Christian for doing this. I've cc'ed users@ mailing list too to avoid situations where users might miss the information and what we are trying to do. Cheers, Dani On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 4:52 PM Christian Glombek wrote: > Dear OKD Community, > > > this is the second Call for Agreement

Re: ANNOUNCEMENT! OKD Community Discussions Moved to okd...@googlegroups.com

James, Serge, Back in July an email was sent to dev mailing list [1] and it was also posted on OpenShift Common agenda announcing the kick off of the working group. In addition we've also sent out a survey trying to understand if folks will be against the google group - the majority was not

Re: [3.x]: openshift router and its own metrics

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 7:46 PM Clayton Coleman wrote: > > > On Aug 15, 2019, at 12:25 PM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > Hi Clayton, > > Certainly some of the metrics should be preserved across reloads, e.g. > metrics like *haproxy_server_http_responses_total *should be p

Re: [3.x]: openshift router and its own metrics

ross reloads, but will not be > preserved across the pod being restarted. > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:30 AM Dan Mace wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:03 AM Daniel Comnea >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Would appreciat

[3.x]: openshift router and its own metrics

Hi, Would appreciate if anyone can please confirm that my understanding is correct w.r.t the way the router haproxy image [1] is built. Am i right to assume that the image [1] is is built as it's seen without any other layer being added to include [2] ? Also am i right to say the haproxy metrics

Re: Follow up on OKD 4

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 5:01 PM Michael Gugino wrote: > I don't really view the 'bucket of parts' and 'complete solution' as > competing ideas. It would be nice to build the 'complete solution' > from the 'bucket of parts' in a reproducible, customizable manner. > "How is this put together"

Re: Follow up on OKD 4

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 8:52 AM Justin Cook wrote: > On 22 Jul 2019, 00:07 +0100, Gleidson Nascimento , wrote: > > I'm with Daniel, I believe it is easier to attract help by using Slack > instead of IRC. > > > My experience over many years — especially with OCP3 — IRC with public > logs smashes

Re: Follow up on OKD 4

Hi Christian, Welcome and thanks for volunteering on kicking off this effort. My vote goes to #openshift-dev slack too, OpenShift Commons Slack scope was/is a bit different geared towards ISVs. IRC - personally have no problem, however the chances to attract more folks (especially non RH

Re: [v4]: v4.1.4 is using internal registry, is this a bug?

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:35 PM Clayton Coleman wrote: > > > On Jul 18, 2019, at 6:24 PM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:08 PM Clayton Coleman > wrote: > >> We generally bump "latest" symlink once it's in the stable channel

Re: [v4]: v4.1.4 is using internal registry, is this a bug?

.openshift.com/pub/openshift-v4/clients/ocp/4.1.4/openshift-install-mac-4.1.4.tar.gz > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:55 PM Daniel Comnea > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Trying a new fresh deployment by downloading a new secret together with >> the installer from try.open

[v4]: v4.1.4 is using internal registry, is this a bug?

Hi, Trying a new fresh deployment by downloading a new secret together with the installer from try.openshift.com i end up in a failure state with bootstrap node caused by *error pulling image >

Re: OKD 4 - A Modest Proposal

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 4:58 AM Clayton Coleman wrote: > > On Jun 26, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Colin Walters wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, at 5:20 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote: > > > > > >> Because the operating system integration is so critical, we need to > >> make sure that the major

Re: OKD 4 - A Modest Proposal

Sorry for missing out the mailer by mistake, not intentional. PSB in blue. On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:14 PM Daniel Comnea wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 6:09 PM Colin Walters wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, at 5:20 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote: &g

Re: [4.x]: understand the role/ scope of image registry operator

hi Ben, thanks for taking the time to respond, please see below. On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 3:50 PM Ben Parees wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 6:44 AM Daniel Comnea > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Initially when i read the docs [1] i assumed that image regis

[4.x]: understand the role/ scope of image registry operator

Hi, Initially when i read the docs [1] i assumed that image registry operator's role is similar to what we used to have in 3.x - a simple registry should the user want to use it for images built with [2] While i was playing with 4.1 i've followed the steps mentioned in [3] because w/o it the

[4.x]: thoughts on how folks should triage and open issues on the right repos?

Hi, In 3.x folks used to open issues on Origin/ openshift-ansible repos or BZ if it was related to OCP. In 4.x the game changed a bit where we have many repos and so my question is: do you have any suggestion/ preference on where folks should open issues and how will they know / be able to

Re: [4.x]: any future plans for proxy-mode: ipvs ?

N and OVNKubernetes networkType ? what new problems does the new OVNKubernetes type solve? [2] https://github.com/ovn-org/ovn-kubernetes That's waiting on Clayton for an LGTM for the mirroring bits (hint hint > :) > > Dan > > > > On Jun 8, 2019, at 4:08 PM, Daniel Comnea &g

[4.x]: any future plans for proxy-mode: ipvs ?

Hi, Are there any future plans in 4.x lifecycle to decouple kube-proxy from OVN and allow setting/ running K8s upstream kube-proxy in ipvs mode ? Cheers, Dani ___ dev mailing list dev@lists.openshift.redhat.com

Re: Openshift Origin builds for CVE-2018-1002105

Cheers for chime in Clayton. In this case you fancy cutting new minor release for 3.10/ 3.11 and then i'll take it over? Dani On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 3:18 PM Clayton Coleman wrote: > This are the correct PRa > > On Dec 6, 2018, at 10:14 AM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > I'll chime

Re: Openshift Origin builds for CVE-2018-1002105

I'll chime in to get some clarity The CentOS rpms are built by the PaaS SIG and is based on the Origin tag release. As such in order to have new origin rpms built/ pushed into CentOS repos we will need: - the fix to make it into 3.11/3.10 Origin branches => done [1] however i am just

Re: [CentOS-devel] [CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.11 rpms available officially released

community >> may be the first to encounter problems but we'll try to fix them if you >> open a github issue. >> >> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 7:24 AM Sandro Bonazzola >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Il giorno ven 9 nov 2018 alle ore 18:15 Daniel Comne

[CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.11 rpms available officially released

Hi, We would like to announce that OKD v3.11 rpms been officially released and are available at [1]. In order to use the released repo [1] we have created and published the rpm (contains the yum configuration file) [2] which is in the main CentOS extra repository. The rpm itself has a

Re: Dropping oadm binary entirely

Okay thanks for the information. So which version will be if is not 4.0 ? i guess is going to be 4.x+ ? On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 1:08 PM Maciej Szulik wrote: > 4.0 and newer. 3.11 is not affected by this change. > > Maciej > > On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:27 PM Daniel

Re: [CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.11 rpms available for testing

Y-CentOS-SIG-PaaS [4] https://cbs.centos.org/repos/paas7-openshift-origin311-testing/ On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 10:38 AM Daniel Comnea wrote: > Hi, > > We would like to announce that OKD v3.11 rpms are available for testing > at [1]. > > As such we are calling for help from comm

Re: [CentOS-devel] [CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.11 rpms available for testing

PSB On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Rich Megginson wrote: > On 10/17/18 3:38 AM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We would like to announce that OKD v3.11 rpms are available for testing > at [1]. > > > > As such we are calling for help from communit

Re: Is Docker enterprise version subscription required for Openshift 3.7

just a quick heads up that i doubt you can deploy any openshift version (3.7+) with a docker version higher than 1.13. On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:07 PM Santosh Kumar30 wrote: > > > Are you saying that we require docker17 or later for Hyperledger fabric > image deployment ? > > If yes, definitely

Re: CI automation location for RPMs is moving

quot;item": {"name": "origin-clients-3.11"}, > "msg": "No package matching 'origin-clients-3.11' found available, > installed or updated", "rc": 126, "results": ["No package matching > 'origin-clients-3.

Re: Plans on cutting Origin 3.11 / 4.0 ?

Sounds good, thanks for the update On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 3:52 PM Clayton Coleman wrote: > I was waiting for some last minute settling of the branch, and I will cut > an rc > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:49 AM Daniel Comnea > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> What a

Plans on cutting Origin 3.11 / 4.0 ?

Hi, What are the plans on cutting a new Origin release ? I see on _release-3.11_ branch on Origin as well as openshift-ansible git repos however i don't see any Origin 3.11 release being out. And then on BZ i see people already raised issues against 3.11 hence my confusion. Thanks, Dani

Re: Service affinity predicate on regions based on label - why needed ?

Hi, Anyone able to help me find out the answer to my previous question? On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 4:39 PM Daniel Comnea wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to understand what were the reasons for adding the K8 service > affinity based on region label [1] ? > > If i remove it to ov

Service affinity predicate on regions based on label - why needed ?

Hi, I'm trying to understand what were the reasons for adding the K8 service affinity based on region label [1] ? If i remove it to overcome the problem described below, what use case will i lose? This predicate attempts to place pods with specific labels in its node selector on nodes that have

Re: CI automation location for RPMs is moving

Clayton, Is the url https://rpms.svc.ci.openshift.org meant to be public available or is only available internally for your own deployments ? In addition, is the plan that everyone deploying OCP/ OKD on RHEL/ CentOS to use the above common repo (assuming is going to be public accessible ) ?

Re: Custom certificate and the host associated with masterPublicURL

tom certificate at the > masterURL wasn't accounted for. > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 9:06 AM, Daniel Comnea > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm trying to understand from a technical point of view the hard > requirement > > around namedCertificates and the hostname associated with t

Custom certificate and the host associated with masterPublicURL

Hi, I'm trying to understand from a technical point of view the hard requirement around namedCertificates and the hostname associated with the masterPublicURL vs masterURL. According to the docs [1] it says " The namedCertificates section should be configured only for the host name associated

Re: Removed "openshift start node" from origin master

e upgrade isolation, and maintain the > appropriate level of security, so some of the more nuanced splits might > take much longer. > > On Aug 14, 2018, at 6:51 PM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > Hi Clayton, > > Great progress! > > So am i right to say that *"**splitting Ope

Re: [CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.10 rpms released to mirror.centos.org repo

Cheers Patrick, we trying our best ;) On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 8:46 PM, Patrick Tescher wrote: > Wow, this is so much faster than any recent release. Good job team! > > > On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:46 AM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > Hi, > > Following my previous [1] notific

[CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.10 rpms released to mirror.centos.org repo

Hi, Following my previous [1] notification, happy to announce the official release of Origin v3.10 rpms which can be found at [2] Thank you, PaaS SIG team [1] http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshift-archives/dev /2018-August/msg1.html [2]

Re: Why rpms are still required with ansible openshift installation 3.10 ?

My understanding is that shouldn't happen, as such i'd suggest you open an issue against openshift-ansible repo On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Charles Moulliard wrote: > Hi > > Is there a reason why these rpms "origin-node-3.10.0" and > "origin-clients-3.10.0" are needed to install origin 3.10

Re: [CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.10 rpms available for testing

testing. Thank you, PaaS SIG team [1] https://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/paas/x86_64/openshift-origin310/ [2]]http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/paas/x86_64/openshift-origin310/ On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 9:46 AM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > Hi, > > We would like to announce that Origin v

[CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.10 rpms available for testing

Hi, We would like to announce that Origin v3.10 rpms are available for testing at [1]. As such we are calling for help from community to start testing and let us know if there are issues with the rpms and its dependencies. And in the spirit of transparency see below the plan to promote the rpms

[CentOS PaaS SIG]: new rpms available

Hi, We would like to announce that new openshift-ansible rpms been made *available:* 1. *openshift v3.6* => openshift-ansible-3.6.173.0.128-1.git.1.a18588a.el7 which can be found at [1] 2. *openshift v3.7* => openshift-ansible-3.7.61-1.git.1.3624530.el7 which can be found at [2]

Re: Custom SCC assigned to wrong pods

Valid points, thank you. I'll reconsider my approach On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 9:17 AM, Vyacheslav Semushin wrote: > 2018-06-20 8:22 GMT+02:00 Daniel Comnea : > >> Thanks Slava for reply. >> >> For everyone benefit (in case others come across the same issue) it was >

Re: Custom SCC assigned to wrong pods

at 11:26 AM, Vyacheslav Semushin wrote: > 2018-06-19 10:31 GMT+02:00 Daniel Comnea : > >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:19 PM, Jordan Liggitt >> wrote: >> >>> Redeploying the application creates new pods. >>> >>> Since you removed t

Re: Custom SCC assigned to wrong pods

even if they get bounced during upgrade. Any thoughts ? Thanks ! On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > I see the rational, thank you for quick response and knowledge. > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:59 PM, Jordan Liggitt > wrote: > >> By making your

Re: Origin 3.10 release

Lala, in case you want to give it a go, you can try [1] which i kicked few days ago to get ourselves in a position to be ready to release the rpms as part of PaaS SIG once Clayton & co will cut a release. HTH, Dani [1] https://cbs.centos.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=449606 On Tue, Jun 12, 2018

Re: Understanding which AWS code will be supported moving forward

don't recommend > using AWS plays and nobody seems to be maintaining them at this point. > > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 5:03 AM, Daniel Comnea > wrote: > > Had a discussion with Ryan on [1] and he kindly answered most of my > > questions however i still have one final set of

Understanding which AWS code will be supported moving forward

Hi, Anyone able to clarify what is the path forward regarding the AWS code deployment? Looking in openshift-ansible repo i do see [1] however looking in openshift- ansible-contrib i do see a different code base for 3.9 (which is also different compared with [3] where cfn was used). Cheers,

Re: Any alternative to "oc adm policy add-scc-to-user" ?

wrote: > 2018-05-25 10:23 GMT+02:00 Daniel Comnea <comnea.d...@gmail.com>: > >> Slava, >> >> spot on !!! >> >> I don't know why i was under the impression that in 3.7 RBAC been fully >> implemented and everything on parity, guess i was wrong. >>

Re: Any alternative to "oc adm policy add-scc-to-user" ?

Semushin <vsemu...@redhat.com> wrote: > 2018-05-24 23:16 GMT+02:00 Daniel Comnea <comnea.d...@gmail.com>: > >> Hi, >> >> Is any alternative to "oc adm policy add-scc-to-user" command in the >> same way there is one for "oc create serviceacco

Re: Any alternative to "oc adm policy add-scc-to-user" ?

Not to mention that with the spec file at least i should be able to use either kubectl or oc cli while with "oc adm" you can do it only with oc cli. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:32 PM, Daniel Comnea <comnea.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well yeah that is an option but then that is mo

Any alternative to "oc adm policy add-scc-to-user" ?

Hi, Is any alternative to "oc adm policy add-scc-to-user" command in the same way there is one for "oc create serviceaccount foo" which can be achieved by apiVersion: v1 kind: ServiceAccount metadata: name: foo-sa namespace: foo I'd like to be able to put all the info in a file rather

Re: OpenShift Web Console - 3.9 - Pod / CrashLoopBackOff

Fair point Slava, hat off. Thanks for the info. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Vyacheslav Semushin wrote: > 2018-05-24 10:10 GMT+02:00 Charles Moulliard : > >> +1 to document somewhere how SCC is working, priority defined, and >> what should be

Re: Custom SCC assigned to wrong pods

t: > > users: > - system:serviceaccount:foo:foo-sa > groups: > - system:authenticated > > > If you want to limit it to just your foo-sa service account, you should > remove the system:authenticated group from the SCC > > > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Dan

Custom SCC assigned to wrong pods

Hi, I'm running Origin 3.7.0 and i've created a custom SCC [1] which is being referenced by different Deployments objects using serviceAccountName: foo- scc-restricted. Now the odd thing which i cannot explain is why glusterFS pods [2] which doesn't reference the new created serviceAccountName

Re: Origin EOL policy and what does trigger a new minor release

is just rolling > (if you merge to release-3.7 the change will show up). > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Daniel Comnea <comnea.d...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm sending out this email to understand what is the Origin EOL policy >>

Re: CentOS PaaS SIG meeting (2018-05-16)

gt; On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Daniel Comnea <comnea.d...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Ricardo, >> >> The email's subject is wrong ;) the meeting for today hasn't started yet. >> I suspect the email's subject should have been dated for May 2nd but that >

Re: CentOS PaaS SIG meeting (2018-05-16)

Ricardo, The email's subject is wrong ;) the meeting for today hasn't started yet. I suspect the email's subject should have been dated for May 2nd but that was sent out so maybe it was sent too early ;) Dani On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:16 PM, Ricardo Martinelli de Oliveira <

Origin EOL policy and what does trigger a new minor release

Hi, I'm sending out this email to understand what is the Origin EOL policy and also understand / start a conversation around what is considered critical bug which does trigger a new Origin minor release. The rational started from [1] where after i migrated all my internal prod environments from

Re: OpenShift Origin incorporating CoreOS technologies ?

be more similar to the > existing setup today than to what tectonic has. We’re still sorting > out how that will work. > > > On May 16, 2018, at 6:28 AM, Daniel Comnea <comnea.d...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Following RH Summit and the news abo

OpenShift Origin incorporating CoreOS technologies ?

Hi, Following RH Summit and the news about CoreOS Tectonic features being integrated into OCP, can we get any insights as to whether the Tectonics features will make it into Origin too? Thank you, Dani ___ dev mailing list