[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Kuryr - Spec

Hello everyone, We have a spec for project Kuryr in Neutron repository [1] , we have been iterating on it internally and with the great help and feedback from the Magnum team. I am glad to say that we reached a pretty good step where we have most of the Magnum team +1 the spec, i personally

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Consistent support for SSL termination proxies across all API services

I've been dealing with this issue lately myself, so here's my two cents: It seems to me that solving this at the service level is actually kind of wrong. As you've discovered, that requires changes in a bunch of different places to address what is really an external issue. Since it's the

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > I just suggested to untie keystone from wsgi and implement uwsgi support. > And then let the user decide what he or she wants. > Keystone is not tied to Apache or mod_wsgi, if that's what you mean. We provide a

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Is SSL offload config possible using non "admin" tenant?

>> This honestly hasn’t even been *fully* tested yet, but it SHOULD work. It did not work. Please read on. >> User sets ACLs on Secrets and Container in Barbican, to allow the LBaaS user >> (right now using whatever user-id we publish in our docs) to read their data. I did perform the above step

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] live migration in Mitaka

Hi, some work items: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-September/073965.html - ci coverage for live-migration https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/split-different-live-migration-types - compute + drivers code cleanup On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 6:47 PM, John Garbutt

Re: [openstack-dev] [releases][requirements][keystone]something incompatible with our requirements

On 09/18/2015 03:32 PM, Robert Collins wrote: I know this is terrible timing with the release and all, but constraints updates are failing. This is the first evidence - and it doesn't look like a race to me:

[openstack-dev] [Novadocker] Resizing docker containers

Hi, I was wondering if it is possible to add support for resizing docker containers without disrupting their execution. Is it even possible, without any direct support from openstack and with modifications to only novadocker? Any insights? Aman

Re: [openstack-dev] [Congress] Congress Usecases VM

It's great to have this available! I think it'll help people understand what's going on MUCH more quickly. Some thoughts. - The image is 3GB, which took me 30 minutes to download. Are all VMs this big? I think we should finish this as a VM but then look into doing it with containers to make it

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Associating patches with bugs/bps (Please don't hurt me)

Although I do think this is a good suggestion, let's resist the temptation to overthink this. No matter what guidance is offered, each exception to a policy needs to be judged individually. I suggest that when we encounter situations like this, that we allow the submitter to simply label the

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On 09/18/2015 12:11 PM, John Griffith wrote: On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Chris Friesen > wrote: On 09/18/2015 11:01 AM, John Griffith wrote: On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Chris Friesen

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] glance core rotation part 1

This is done. On 9/14/15 7:45 AM, Fei Long Wang wrote: > +1 > > Yep, it would be nice if Zhi Yan can promote OpenStack in Alibaba :) > > On 14/09/15 22:59, Mikhail Fedosin wrote: >> +1. >> I hope that Zhi Yan joined Alibaba to make it use Openstack in the >> future :) >> >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 09/18/2015 12:11 PM, John Griffith wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Chris Friesen < >> chris.frie...@windriver.com >> > wrote: >> >> On 09/18/2015

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] PTL & Component Leads elections

Dims, Thanks for the reminder! I've summarized the uncontroversial parts of that thread in a policy proposal as per you suggestion [0], please review and comment. I've renamed SMEs to maintainers since Mike has agreed with that part, and I omitted code review SLAs from the policy since that's

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Design Summit Topics for Nova

On 17 September 2015 at 15:23, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:40:28AM -0700, melanie witt wrote: > >> Today I was informed that google forms are blocked in China [1], so I wanted >> to mention it here so we can consider an alternate way to collect

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral][requirements] lockfile not in global requirements

Hi, Andreas, Sorry for the late response from Mistral. Anyway, I'm coming :-) I'll take a look and solve it if needed, thanks for letting us know that. On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > The syncing of requirements fails from the requirements repository to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On 18/09/15 09:17 +0100, Steven Hardy wrote: On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 08:56:06AM +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 17/09/15 16:00 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: >Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2015-09-17 12:51:33 -0700: > >>I think this is all superfluous however and we should simply

[openstack-dev] Hardware requirements for OpenStack

Hello I am new to OpenStack and following http://docs.openstack.org/juno/install-guide/install/apt/content/ch_basic_environment.html guide to install OpenStack on my local PC. My question is do i need separate machines Controller, Network and Compute node ( connected via LAN ) or i can install

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On 17/09/15 16:00 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2015-09-17 12:51:33 -0700: I think this is all superfluous however and we should simply encourage people to not wait until the last minute. Waiting to see who is running/what the field looks like isn't as

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [ptl] Troubleshooting cross-project communications

On 18 September 2015 at 00:50, Mike Perez wrote: > On 16:16 Sep 16, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Anne Gentle wrote: >> > [...] >> > What are some of the problems with each layer? >> > >> > 1. weekly meeting: time zones, global reach, size of cross-project >> > concerns due to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

Le 17/09/2015 23:09, Nikhil Komawar a écrit : On 9/17/15 3:51 PM, Morgan Fainberg wrote: On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Kevin Benton > wrote: It guarantees that if you hit the date deadline local time, that you won't miss the

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [inspector] Liberty soft freeze

Note for inspector folks: this applies to us as well. Lets land whatever we have planned for 2.2.0 and fix any issues arising. Please see milestone page for list of things that we still need to review/fix: https://launchpad.net/ironic-inspector/+milestone/2.2.0 On 09/18/2015 03:50 AM, Jim

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On 17/09/15 15:47 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2015-09-17 18:10:26 +0200: Monty Taylor wrote: > I agree- and this is a great example of places where human judgement is > better than rules. > > For instance - one of the projects had a nominee but it

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Eric Harney wrote: > On 09/18/2015 01:01 PM, John Griffith wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Chris Friesen < > chris.frie...@windriver.com> > > wrote: > > > >> On 09/18/2015 06:57 AM, Eric Harney wrote: > >> > >>> On 09/17/2015

Re: [openstack-dev] [releases][requirements][keystone]something incompatible with our requirements

Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-09-19 07:32:18 +1200: > I know this is terrible timing with the release and all, but > constraints updates are failing. This is the first evidence - and it > doesn't look like a race to me: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Barbican] Providing service user read access to all tenant's certificates

Typos corrected. From: Vijay Venkatachalam Sent: 18 September 2015 00:36 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: RE: [openstack-dev] [Barbican] Providing service user read access to all tenant's certificates Yes Dave, that

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Is SSL offload config possible using non "admin" tenant?

Sure Adam. Pleasure is mine ☺. Also, I don’t see any wrong doing by LBaaS (infact it is the right thing to do) if LBaaS plugin is specifying the tenant containers unique URL and also correct tenant context in the keystone session to fetch the container. Although, if barbican fixes to ignore

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On 09/18/2015 03:33 PM, John Griffith wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Eric Harney wrote: > >> On 09/18/2015 01:01 PM, John Griffith wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Chris Friesen < >> chris.frie...@windriver.com> >>> wrote: >>> On 09/18/2015 06:57

Re: [openstack-dev] [Congress] Congress Usecases VM

Hi Congress folks, BTW the login/password for the VM is vagrant/vagrant -Shiv From: Shiv Haris [mailto:sha...@brocade.com] Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 5:03 PM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: [openstack-dev] [Congress] Congress Usecases VM Hi All, I have put my VM

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On 09/18/2015 01:01 PM, John Griffith wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Chris Friesen > wrote: > >> On 09/18/2015 06:57 AM, Eric Harney wrote: >> >>> On 09/17/2015 06:06 PM, John Griffith wrote: >>> >> >> Having the "global conf" settings intermixed with the

[openstack-dev] [releases][requirements][keystone]something incompatible with our requirements

I know this is terrible timing with the release and all, but constraints updates are failing. This is the first evidence - and it doesn't look like a race to me: http://logs.openstack.org/57/221157/10/check/gate-tempest-dsvm-full/18eb440/logs/devstacklog.txt.gz#_2015-09-18_13_51_46_902

Re: [openstack-dev] [Barbican] Providing service user read access to all tenant's certificates

I would think OpenStack as Self Service portal. Anyway, tenant’s admin need not play cloud admin’s role. Only the cloud admin who sets up and manages openstack infrastructure (like controller Nodes etc) could know about the LBaaS service user. As much as possible the tenant admin should not be

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Is SSL offload config possible using non "admin" tenant?

That sounds like the Barbican ACLs are not working properly. The whole point of using Barbican ACLs is that the keystone session marked for tenant "admin" should be able to get access to ANY tenant’s container/secrets if the ACLs are set. I am still not convinced this is an issue on the LBaaS

Re: [openstack-dev] [releases][requirements][keystone]something incompatible with our requirements

I'm not seeing the source of this at a quick glance (in keystoneclient where I am assuming the plugin is being loaded from?). I'll look a bit more closely after I finish my food. --Morgan Sent via mobile > On Sep 18, 2015, at 12:32, Robert Collins wrote: > > I

Re: [openstack-dev] [releases][requirements][keystone]something incompatible with our requirements

On 19 September 2015 at 08:03, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-09-19 07:32:18 +1200: >> I know this is terrible timing with the release and all, but >> constraints updates are failing. This is the first evidence - and it >> doesn't look

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 09/18/2015 11:01 AM, John Griffith wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Chris Friesen < >> chris.frie...@windriver.com >> > wrote: >> >> On 09/18/2015

[openstack-dev] openstack-dahboard directory is not created

Link: https://openstack.nimeyo.com/59453/?show=59453#q59453 From: vidya I am trying to create openstack -dashboard on my VM and /usr/share/openstack-dashboard in not create. Please help me what i am missing here. here is what i tried 1 yum install openstack-selinux

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

The conversations around alternative wsgi containers (uwsgi, gunicorn, etc) still would be tied to apache or nginx. While it is possible to deploy without the webservers in some cases, jt would not be recommended nor do I see that being tested in gate. We want to leverage the auth support of

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [ptl] Troubleshooting cross-project communications

> On Sep 17, 2015, at 7:50 PM, Mike Perez wrote: > >> On 16:16 Sep 16, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Anne Gentle wrote: >>> [...] >>> What are some of the problems with each layer? >>> >>> 1. weekly meeting: time zones, global reach, size of cross-project >>> concerns due to

Re: [openstack-dev] [releases][requirements][keystone]something incompatible with our requirements

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > I know this is terrible timing with the release and all, but > constraints updates are failing. This is the first evidence - and it > doesn't look like a race to me: > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Kuryr - Spec

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Gal Sagie wrote: > Hello everyone, > > We have a spec for project Kuryr in Neutron repository [1] , we have been > iterating on it > internally and with the great help and feedback from the Magnum team. > > I am glad to say that we reached a

[openstack-dev] (NOVA) Is there a Queue maintained for instance requests

Hi, I had a question regarding the process of spawning an instance. In the whole process from requesting an instance to scheduling to spawning ,is there a queue maintained where the requests go first, like in the case of a scheduler of any OS that has a queue for jobs to be scheduled. This

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Barbican container lookup fron lbaas

Hi Guys, With lbaasv2, I noticed that when we try to associate tls containers with lbaas listeners, lbaas tries to validate the container and while doing so, tries to get keystone token based on tenant/user credentials in neutron.conf file. However, the barbican containers could belong to

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] PTL & Component Leads elections

+1 Dmitry -- Dims On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: > Dims, > > Thanks for the reminder! > > I've summarized the uncontroversial parts of that thread in a policy > proposal as per you suggestion [0], please review and comment. I've > renamed

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [oslo.privsep] Any progress on privsep?

Thanks for your reply, Gus. That's awesome. I'd like to have a look at it or test if possible. Any source code available in the upstream? On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Angus Lees wrote: > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 at 14:13 Li Ma wrote: >> >> Hi

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq]

Excerpts from ozamiatin's message of 2015-09-16 18:24:53 +0300: > Hi All, > > I'm excited to report that today we have merged [1] new zmq driver into > oslo.messaging master branch. > The driver is not completely done yet, so we are going to continue > developing it on the master branch now. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Barbican] Providing service user read access to all tenant's certificates

>From description of use case, looks like you want 'service user' to access any >tenant resource regardless of that user has a tenant role or not and without >explicit read assignment on that resource. This can be done via a customized >policy where related 'get' calls are allowed access for

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Eric Harney wrote: > On 09/18/2015 03:33 PM, John Griffith wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Eric Harney > wrote: > > > >> On 09/18/2015 01:01 PM, John Griffith wrote: > >>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][ptl][release] final liberty cycle client library releases needed

Doug, python-mistralclient-1.1.0 (also on pypi) is the final release for Liberty. Here’s the patch updating global-requirements.txt: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/225330/ (upper-constraints.txt should be soon updated automatically, in my

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] Define better terms for WAITING and DELAYED states

> On 18 Sep 2015, at 18:47, HADDLETON, Robert W (Bob) > wrote: > > Hi Renat: > > [TL;DR] - maybe use multiple words in the state name to avoid confusion > > I agree that there is a lot of overlap - WAITING and DELAYED and POSTPONED > are all very similar.

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Associating patches with bugs/bps (Please don't hurt me)

For the guidance, I saw the judgement is a bit subjective. It could happen that a contributor think his/her patch is trivial (or it is not fixing a function defect), but a reviewer think the opposite. For example, I find it hard to judge when I reviewed the following patches:

Re: [openstack-dev] [releases][requirements][keystone]something incompatible with our requirements

On 09/18/2015 04:29 PM, Robert Collins wrote: On 19 September 2015 at 08:03, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-09-19 07:32:18 +1200: I know this is terrible timing with the release and all, but constraints updates are failing. This is

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq]

Hear hear! nice work Oleksii and team! -- Dims On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from ozamiatin's message of 2015-09-16 18:24:53 +0300: > > Hi All, > > > > I'm excited to report that today we have merged [1] new zmq driver into > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] PTL & Component Leads elections

Sergey, Fuelers This is awesome news! By the way, I have a question on who is eligible to vote and to nominate him/her-self for both PTL and Component Leads. Could you elaborate on that? And there is no such entity as Component Lead in OpenStack - so we are actually creating one. What are the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On 09/17/2015 09:15 PM, Nikhil Komawar wrote: > > I like to solve problems and seems like this is a common problem in many > conferences, seminars, etc. The usual way of solving this issue is to > have a grace period with last minute extension to deadline for > proposals, possibly for a unknown

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On 18/09/15 12:22 +, Tristan Cacqueray wrote: On 09/17/2015 09:15 PM, Nikhil Komawar wrote: I like to solve problems and seems like this is a common problem in many conferences, seminars, etc. The usual way of solving this issue is to have a grace period with last minute extension to

[openstack-dev] [nova] live migration in Mitaka

Hi All, There are various efforts going on around live migration at the moment: fixing up CI, bug fixes, additions to cover more corner cases, proposals for new operations Generally live migration could do with a little TLC (see: [1]), so I am going to suggest we give some of that care in

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral][requirements] lockfile not in global requirements

On 09/18/2015 12:54 PM, Renat Akhmerov wrote: Thanks Andreas and Lingxian, Andreas, the corresponding patch has landed: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/225073/ Great, then syncing of requirements should be green again. thanks, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org}

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On 09/18/2015 09:41 AM, Steven Hardy wrote: >> In my previous email I mentioned that folks can simply send the >> > candidacy in advance or have someone else to propose it. Seriously, >> > it's not about having a single day for sending the candidacy, it's >> > about having a clear deadline where

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Separate floating IP pools?

Is it possible to have separate floating-IP pools and grant a tenant access to only some of them? Thought popped into my head while looking at the rbac-network spec here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/132661/4/specs/liberty/rbac-networks.rst Creating individual pools, allowing only some

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral][requirements] lockfile not in global requirements

Thanks Andreas and Lingxian, Andreas, the corresponding patch has landed: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/225073/ Renat Akhmerov @ Mirantis Inc. > On 18 Sep 2015, at 12:08, Lingxian Kong wrote: > > Hi, Andreas, > > Sorry

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] PTL & Component Leads elections

Sergey, Please see [1]. Did we codify some of these roles and responsibilities as a community in a spec? There was also a request to use terminology like say MAINTAINERS in that email as well. Are we pulling the trigger a bit early for an actual election? Thanks, Dims [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On 09/18/2015 06:58 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 17/09/15 15:47 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2015-09-17 18:10:26 +0200: >>> Monty Taylor wrote: >>> > I agree- and this is a great example of places where human >>> judgement is >>> > better than rules.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 08:56:06AM +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 17/09/15 16:00 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2015-09-17 12:51:33 -0700: > > > >>I think this is all superfluous however and we should simply encourage > >>people to not wait until the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 10:55:30AM +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 18/09/15 09:17 +0100, Steven Hardy wrote: > >On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 08:56:06AM +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote: > >>On 17/09/15 16:00 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >>>Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2015-09-17 12:51:33

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

On 18/09/15 06:44 -0700, Morgan Fainberg wrote: There is and has been desire to support uWSGI and other alternatives to mod_wsgi. There are a variety of operational reasons to consider uWSGI and/or gunicorn behind apache most notably to facilitate easier management of the processes independently

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] To NTP, or not to NTP, that is the question

On 9/18/15, 08:03, "Major Hayden" wrote: >Hey there, > >I start working on a bug[1] last night about adding a managed NTP >configuration to openstack-ansible hosts. My patch[2] gets chrony up and >running with configurable NTP servers, but I'm still struggling to meet >the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][i18n] Is there any point in using _() inpython-novaclient?

With the limited resources that the translation team has, we should not translate the clients but concentrate on the openstackclient, as discussed here: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-i18n/2015-September/001402.html Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org}

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On 09/18/2015 06:57 AM, Eric Harney wrote: On 09/17/2015 06:06 PM, John Griffith wrote: Having the "global conf" settings intermixed with the backend sections caused a number of issues when we first started working on this. That's part of why we require the "self.configuration" usage all

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

Please consider that we use some apache mods - does nginx/uwsgi/gunicorn have oauth, shibboleth & openid support? On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > Folks > > I think we do not need to switch to nginx-only or consider any kind of war > between nginx

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

There are 2 dimensions this discussion should happen in: web server and application server. Now we use apache2 as web server and mod_wsgi as app server. I don't have a specific opinion on the app server (mod_wsgi vs uwsgi) and I don't really care. Regarding apache2 vs nginx. I don't see any

[openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] To NTP, or not to NTP, that is the question

Hey there, I start working on a bug[1] last night about adding a managed NTP configuration to openstack-ansible hosts. My patch[2] gets chrony up and running with configurable NTP servers, but I'm still struggling to meet the "Proposal" section of the bug where the author has asked for

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

Folks I think we do not need to switch to nginx-only or consider any kind of war between nginx and apache adherents. Everyone should be able to use web-server he or she needs without being pinned to the unwanted one. It is like Postgres vs MySQL war. Why not support both? May be someone does not

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On 09/17/2015 06:06 PM, John Griffith wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Eric Harney wrote: > >> On 09/17/2015 05:00 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote: >>> On 16 September 2015 at 23:43, Eric Harney wrote: >>> Currently, at least some options set in

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

There is and has been desire to support uWSGI and other alternatives to mod_wsgi. There are a variety of operational reasons to consider uWSGI and/or gunicorn behind apache most notably to facilitate easier management of the processes independently of the webserver itself. With mod_wsgi the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Barbican] Providing service user read access to all tenant's certificates

> But that approach looks a little untidy, because tenant admin has to do some infrastructure work. I would think infrastructure work would be part of the admin role. They are doing other things such as creating LBaaS, which seems like an infrastructure job to me. I would think configuring LBaaS

[openstack-dev] [mistral] Define better terms for WAITING and DELAYED states

Hello, We have a bug [1] that addresses the small semantical issue in names of the states for workflow and task executions: WAITING and DELAYED. I’m really interested in your opinion about this. Especially native english speakers’ opinion because, IMO, they would be able to challenge better

Re: [openstack-dev] Hardware requirements for OpenStack

Yes, you should be able to install controller, neutron and compute node on a single PC (all-in-one). If you google it, you will find many practical guide on how to do it. Here is one example : https://fosskb.wordpress.com/2015/04/18/installing-openstack-kilo-on-ubuntu-15-04-single-machine-setup/

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

On 09/17/2015 10:04 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 06:48:50PM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: In the fuel project, we recently ran into a couple of issues with Apache2 + mod_wsgi as we switched Keystone to run . Please see [1] and [2]. Looking deep into Apache2 issues

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] To NTP, or not to NTP, that is the question

Major, in Fuel, we've dealt with this problem for a long time in its varying degrees of unpleasantness. Some virtualization platforms, such as VirtualBox, are very prone to time drift. Hardware nodes, thankfully, don't suffer so badly. Time sync is very important for RabbitMQ, Corosync, and

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] To NTP, or not to NTP, that is the question

On 09/18/2015 11:04 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: On 9/18/15, 08:03, "Major Hayden" wrote: Hey there, I start working on a bug[1] last night about adding a managed NTP configuration to openstack-ansible hosts. My patch[2] gets chrony up and running with configurable NTP servers,

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

I am with Adam, I kinda doubt Apache cause performance issues for Keystone, especially since all we have are just simple REST APIs. For other services with specific needs, like large file streaming, there may be some arguments to pick one over the other. We haven’t had the need to use Apache

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 09/18/2015 06:57 AM, Eric Harney wrote: > >> On 09/17/2015 06:06 PM, John Griffith wrote: >> > > Having the "global conf" settings intermixed with the backend sections >>> caused a number of issues when we

[openstack-dev] [all] Cross-project workshop session suggestions

Hello everyone, At the Mitaka Design Summit in Tokyo we'll have a cross-project workshops track on the Tuesday, as usual. The Technical Committee is responsible for coming up with an agenda there, but we are interested in your suggestions. To that effect, we revived an instance of the good old

[openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL Voting is now open

Elections are underway and will remain open for you to cast your vote until 13:00 UTC September 24, 2015 We are having elections for Cinder, Glance, Ironic, Keystone, Mistral, Neutron and Oslo. If you are a Foundation individual member and had a commit in one of the program's projects[0] over

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Separate floating IP pools?

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 4:55 AM, Clark, Robert Graham wrote: > Is it possible to have separate floating-IP pools and grant a tenant access > to only some of them? It is possible to have multiple floating IP pools by creating multiple external networks. However, it is not

[openstack-dev] [rating] CloudKitty's future and Big tent application

Hi, We've lacked communication on the mailing list regarding CloudKitty. This mail is basically an interest check regarding CloudKitty and rating for OpenStack. During the Vancouver OpenStack Summit we talked to a lot of people about CloudKitty and its purpose. Many people seemed interested, and

[openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

Folks I just suggested to untie keystone from wsgi and implement uwsgi support. And then let the user decide what he or she wants. There is a plenty of auth modules for nginx also. Nginx us much better as a proxy server and you know it. Regarding mod wsgi and apache we already saw that it

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] live migration in Mitaka

On 18 September 2015 at 16:23, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:53:05AM +, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> There are various efforts going on around live migration at the moment: >> fixing up CI, bug fixes, additions to cover more

Re: [openstack-dev] Apache2 vs uWSGI vs ...

I thoughts below mention Keystone, but in reality I would apply the same logic to any OpenStack service. On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Boris Bobrov wrote: > There are 2 dimensions this discussion should happen in: web server and > application server. Now we use

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] live migration in Mitaka

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:53:05AM +, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote: > Hi All, > > There are various efforts going on around live migration at the moment: > fixing up CI, bug fixes, additions to cover more corner cases, proposals > for new operations > > Generally live migration could do

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] Define better terms for WAITING and DELAYED states

Hi Renat: [TL;DR] - maybe use multiple words in the state name to avoid confusion I agree that there is a lot of overlap - WAITING and DELAYED and POSTPONED are all very similar. The context is important when trying to decipher what the words means. I would normally interpret WAITING as

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Consistent support for SSL termination proxies across all API services

+1 From: Mathieu Gagné [mga...@internap.com] Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 5:38 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Consistent support for SSL termination proxies across all API services

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-i18n] [nova][i18n] Is there any point in using _() inpython-novaclient?

On 18 September 2015 at 15:46, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > With the limited resources that the translation team has, we should not > translate the clients but concentrate on the openstackclient, as discussed > here: > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] To NTP, or not to NTP, that is the question

My $0.02 Support configuring ntp. Have a flag that can turn that piece off. Default it on. Profit. :) Thanks, Kevin From: Major Hayden [ma...@mhtx.net] Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 6:03 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

On Sep 18, 2015, at 7:27 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote: >> I'm strongly against this extra rules. OpenStack Officials Elections are >> ran by volunteers and any rules that adds complexity should be avoided. > > +1 > > Also, the schedule is announced 6 months in advance. The

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet][keystone] Choose domain names with 'composite namevar' or 'meaningless name'?

On 09/16/2015 02:58 PM, Cody Herriges wrote: I wrote my first composite namevar type a few years and ago and all the magic is basically a single block of code inside the type... https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-java_ks/blob/master/lib/puppet/type/java_ks.rb#L145-L169 It basically boils

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] LVM snapshot performance issue -- why isn't thin provisioning the default?

On 09/18/2015 11:01 AM, John Griffith wrote: On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Chris Friesen > wrote: On 09/18/2015 06:57 AM, Eric Harney wrote: On 09/17/2015 06:06 PM, John Griffith wrote: Having the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination period is now over

I agree with Ed here. If we have a stipulated time period set for proposals then grace period sounds like a real-life deal. However, I would also encourage the idea of opening this up early and keep the folder ready and officials review the merge prop 2 months prior to the final date. It's better