[openstack-dev] [neutron][ovs-agent] Interface monitor is not active

hi, all " Interface monitor is not active ", ovs agent log file says this error message. I have no idea about that. I think that ovs agent cant not connect the ovsdb rightly. This message, "is_connected: true" doesn't display in my terminal when I run " ovs-vsctl show ". Could

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC

On 20 May 2016 at 17:37, Elzur, Uri wrote: > Hi Armando, Cathy, All > > > > First I apologize for the delay, returning from a week long international > trip. (yes, I know, a lousy excuse on many accounts…) > > > > If I’m attempting to summarize all the responses, it seems

[openstack-dev] [Keystone] Welcome Keystone to the World of Python 3

We've gone through all of our test cases and all of our code base. At this point Keystone is no longer skipping any of the tests (which do tend to test the entire request stack) and we are properly gating on being Python3.4 compatible. I want to thank everyone who has put in effort in the last

Re: [openstack-dev] [aodhclient] does the aodh have the feature for import/export batch alarms?

Hi, Thank you for giving me a good solution, although now I'm not familiar with Heat Template too much, I will research it to implement the requirement. BR, Rajen > > > Hi, > > > I also agree with ZhiQiang. > > How about using Heat Template which improve portability

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC

Hi Uri, I originally wrote the Tacker->ODL SFC NSH piece and have been working with Tacker and networking-sfc team to bring it upstream into OpenStack. Cathy, Stephen, Louis and the rest of the networking-sfc team have been very receptive to changes specific to NSH around their current API and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][TC] support of NSH in networking-SFC

In a nutshell, you’ve got it, you can’t add an API without a reference implementation, including data-plane, which has to be open-source (though does not have to itself be openstack.) > o Especially as Stadium, can we let Neutron to lead the industry, given > broad enough community interest?

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC

Hi Armando, Cathy, All First I apologize for the delay, returning from a week long international trip. (yes, I know, a lousy excuse on many accounts…) If I’m attempting to summarize all the responses, it seems like · A given abstraction in Neutron is allowed (e.g. in support of SFC),

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] support of NSH in networking-SFC

Hi Cathy Pls note my other response to the list on this subject. It is not clear to me on what ground is the following conclusion derived. Was asking Armando a clear answer to the topic at hand Thx Uri (“Oo-Ree”) C: 949-378-7568 -Original Message- From: Cathy Zhang

Re: [openstack-dev] [javascript] Seeking contributors, js-generator-openstack

Hi, Michael As you are no longer alone now, we'd better to put things in your head onto documents so that everybody who wish to contribute will know where to go. Besides the technical roadmap, I think we shall need a space for issue tracking and proposal discussion. After we make the project

[openstack-dev] [glance] Focus for week R-19 May 23-27

Hi team, The focus for week R-19 is as follows: * Mon-Wed: please focus on reviewing specs and lite-specs. Remember the soft-spec freeze is approaching (R-16), this is when we decide what specs are likely to be merged in Newton. So, keep reviewing specs. And I have pointed out to many of your

[openstack-dev] [glance] Best practices for glance weekly team meetings

Hi team, I have noticed it lately that people were being reluctant on paying attention to the agenda proposed; either there were too many proposals or one too many last minute additions. We also did not have any process to effectively manage the agenda already proposed. So, as discussed at this

[openstack-dev] [glance] [defcore] [interop] Proposal for a virtual sync dedicated to Import Refactor May 26th

Hello all, I want to propose having a dedicated virtual sync next week Thursday May 26th at 1500UTC for one hour on the Import Refactor work [1] ongoing in Glance. We are making a few updates to the spec; so it would be good to have everyone on the same page and soon start merging those spec

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] API changes on limit / marker / sort in Newton

+1 on all your suggestions below, Sean. -jay On 05/20/2016 08:05 AM, Sean Dague wrote: There are a number of changes up for spec reviews that add parameters to LIST interfaces in Newton: * keypairs-pagination (MERGED) -

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] [VMT] [Security] Proposal to add Brian Rosmaita to the glance-coresec team

On 5/20/16 5:23 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-05-20 16:47:50 -0400 (-0400), Nikhil Komawar wrote: > [...] >> Please note, however, after talking with Brian and Hemanth, Hemanth has >> signed up to be Glance liaison to the VMT team along with me. I've >> updated the wiki: >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] [VMT] [Security] Proposal to add Brian Rosmaita to the glance-coresec team

On 2016-05-20 16:47:50 -0400 (-0400), Nikhil Komawar wrote: [...] > Please note, however, after talking with Brian and Hemanth, Hemanth has > signed up to be Glance liaison to the VMT team along with me. I've > updated the wiki: >

[openstack-dev] [glance] [VMT] [security] NOTICE: Current structure of the glance-core-sec team

Hi all, There have been some recent changes to the glance-core-sec team and liaisons. So, I wanted to send this notice out for people to be aware and know who to reach out to if they have any issues to discuss. The current glance-core-sec team includes: * Brian Rosmaita * Flavio Percoco *

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] [VMT] [Security] Proposal to add Brian Rosmaita to the glance-coresec team

On 5/12/16 5:38 PM, Nikhil Komawar wrote: > Comments, alternate proposal inline. > > > > On 5/12/16 8:35 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> On 2016-05-11 23:39:58 -0400 (-0400), Nikhil Komawar wrote: >>> I would like to propose adding add Brian to the team. >> [...] >> >> I'm thrilled to see Glance

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Nominate XiYuan Wang and Hao Wang for Zaqar core

+1 Thanks for all your work wxy and wanghao 2016-05-20 15:11 GMT-03:00 Eva Balycheva : > +1 > > Yes. I also noticed that they are good at finding and fixing bugs. They > explore Zaqar and question everything. They don't close their eyes on > problems. And I like it. > > Hao

[openstack-dev] [glance] NOTICE: Glance midcycle meetup for Newton CANCELLED

Hi, Please note that the Glance midcycle meetup for Newton has been cancelled as per the agreement [1] at the Glance weekly meeting that happened Thursday May 19th. The meetup agenda [2] etherpad has been updated to reflect the same. Note to wiki moderators: The Sprints wiki [3] has been

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] DHCP Agent Scheduling for Segments

On Thu, 2016-05-19 at 14:16 -0600, Carl Baldwin wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > >>I may have wrongly assumed that segments MAY have the possibility of being > >> l2 adjacent, even if the entire network they are in is not, which would > >> mean >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][ML2][Routed Networks]

On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 15:29 -0600, Carl Baldwin wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Hong Hui Xiao wrote: > > I update [1] to auto delete dhcp port if there is no other ports. But > > after the dhcp port is deleted, the dhcp service is not usable. I can > > I think this

Re: [openstack-dev] 答复: [Heat][Glance] Can't migrate to glance v2 completely

On 05/20/2016 01:03 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Erno Kuvaja's message of 2016-05-20 13:20:11 +0100: >> >> The only reliable way to create Glance images for consumption in general >> manner is to make sure that we use the normal workflows (currently >> uploading the image to Glance and

Re: [openstack-dev] Neutron: Octavia: LBaaS: RFE created for DVR support for unbound allowed_address_pair port with FIP which are associated with multiple VMs that are active.

Thanks for putting that up, very detailed! On Thu, 2016-05-19 at 16:43 +, Vasudevan, Swaminathan (PNB Roseville) wrote: > Hi Folks, > > There has been recently a lot of requests for Neutron DVR to support > unbound allowed_address_pair port with FIP which are associated with > multiple VMs

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Nominate XiYuan Wang and Hao Wang for Zaqar core

+1 Yes. I also noticed that they are good at finding and fixing bugs. They explore Zaqar and question everything. They don't close their eyes on problems. And I like it. Hao and XiYuan, thank you for your contributions. Let's continue working together. =) On 05/19/2016 02:53 PM, Fei Long

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [tracking] Renames and verification; was Re: ceilometer-specs submodule path is invalid

On 2016-05-20 09:52:39 +0800 (+0800), Gerard Braad wrote: [...] > This process seems very prone to human-error. Let's hope this > would happen less often in the future with the instructions. Is > there a way to verify this? It's a bit messy, but updates to that file have only ever been

Re: [openstack-dev] 答复: [Heat][Glance] Can't migrate to glance v2 completely

Excerpts from Erno Kuvaja's message of 2016-05-20 13:20:11 +0100: > > The only reliable way to create Glance images for consumption in general > manner is to make sure that we use the normal workflows (currently > uploading the image to Glance and in future the supported manners of Image >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Zaqar messages standardization

On Fri, 2016-05-20 at 17:52 +0200, Jiri Tomasek wrote: > Hey all, > > I've been recently working on getting the TripleO UI integrated with > Zaqar, so it can receive a messages from Mistral workflows and act > upon them without having to do various polling hacks. > > Since there is currently

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Newton priorities and primary contacts

Hello, Ruby Loo said on Wed, May 04, 2016 at 02:29:34PM -0400: If you are interested in a particular feature on this list, or would like to contribute code towards that end, or would like to help review, or test, that is wonderful and I thank you so much for your interest and desire to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] supporting Go

Excerpts from Thomas Goirand's message of 2016-05-20 12:42:09 +0200: > On 05/11/2016 04:17 PM, Dean Troyer wrote: > > The big difference with Go here is that the dependency work happens at > > build time, not deploy/runtime in most cases. That shifts much of the > > burden to people

Re: [openstack-dev] [javascript] Seeking contributors, js-generator-openstack

Hi there! Well, the first thing we need is other reviewers, which is the fastest way to become a core :). The project page right now is the README.md file in the project itself. The main reason for this is that the target audience - javascript engineers - usually find that first via NPM. Most of

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] supporting Go

Containers are popular right now for the same reason statically linking is. But it gives you something half way in between. Static linking is really hard to do right. Even go's "static link all the things" is incomplete. if you run ldd on a go binary, it isn't actually static. Containers ensure

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Update_port can not remove allocation from auto-addressed subnets

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 6:06 AM, Pavel Bondar wrote: > Hi, > > Currently using update_port workflow user can not remove ip addresses from > auto-addressed subnets (SLAAC). It prevents me from implementing complete > fix for [1]. > > Typically for removing ip address from

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] Multi-attach/Cinder-Nova weekly IRC meetings

Hi All, We have now the approved slot for the Cinder-Nova interaction changes meeting series. The new slot is __Monday, 1700UTC__, it will be on channel __#openstack-meeting-cp__. Related etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cinder-nova-api-changes Summary about ongoing items:

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron-lbaas] Multiple back-end support for lbaas v2

What Sergey said is absolutely correct. Additionally, if a user does not provide "provider" in the request to create a load balancer than the service_provider that is tagged with the default flag will be chosen. Thanks, Brandon On Fri, 2016-05-20 at 12:23 +0300, Sergey Belous wrote: > Hi. > >

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Zaqar messages standardization

Hey all, I've been recently working on getting the TripleO UI integrated with Zaqar, so it can receive a messages from Mistral workflows and act upon them without having to do various polling hacks. Since there is currently quite a large amount of new TripleO workflows comming to tripleo-common,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Deprecated options in sample configs?

On 20.05.2016 16:51, Ben Nemec wrote: > On 05/20/2016 04:26 AM, Markus Zoeller wrote: >> On 05/19/2016 09:18 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: >>> On 05/17/2016 07:27 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: If config sample files are being used as a living document then that would be a reason to leave

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] supporting Go

On 05/20/2016 08:48 AM, Dean Troyer wrote: On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Thomas Goirand > wrote: I am *NOT* buying that doing static linking is a progress. We're back 30 years in the past, before the .so format. It is amazing that some

[openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler] Next Scheduler sub-team meeting

The next meeting of the Nova Scheduler sub-team will be Monday, May 23 at 1400 UTC. http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20160523T14 The agenda is here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NovaScheduler Please update the agenda before the meeting with any items you

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Deprecated options in sample configs?

On 05/20/2016 04:26 AM, Markus Zoeller wrote: > On 05/19/2016 09:18 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: >> On 05/17/2016 07:27 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: >>> >>> If config sample files are being used as a living document then that >>> would be a reason to leave the deprecated options in there. In my >>>

[openstack-dev] [horizon] [antiddos] New project antiddos

Hello, fellow developers! i need to create a new project to sell antiDDoS the horizon . what do you recommend me as the first start of the project? Does anyone know any documentation to start a project in django on OpenStack standard. thank you

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] Proposing Ivan Berezovskiy for puppet-openstack-core

+1 On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Ivan Berezovskiy wrote: > Thank you all for the trust! I'll do my best :) > > 2016-05-19 18:57 GMT+03:00 Alex Schultz : > >> +1 great job Ivan >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Matt Fischer

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova-lxd]Nova-lxd with Linuxbridge

Hi, Currently it only works with OVS mode, there is a patch lying around for Linuxbridge agent support that needs to be integrated. Thanks chuck On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Gyorgy Szombathelyi < gyorgy.szombathe...@doclerholding.com> wrote: > Hi! > > I just have a simple question: is

Re: [openstack-dev] [osops-tools-monitoring][monitoring-for-openstack] Code duplication

On 2016-05-20 15:28:48 +0200 (+0200), Martin Magr wrote: [...] > so from "This import will probably lead to the end of > monitoring-for-openstack project" it seems that project deletion > just was not performed at the end. Is anybody against submitting > patch to openstack-infra to delete the

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] Proposing Ivan Berezovskiy for puppet-openstack-core

Thank you all for the trust! I'll do my best :) 2016-05-19 18:57 GMT+03:00 Alex Schultz : > +1 great job Ivan > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Matt Fischer > wrote: > >> +1 from me! >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Emilien Macchi

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Nodes management in our shiny new TripleO API

On 05/20/2016 03:42 PM, John Trowbridge wrote: On 05/19/2016 09:31 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: Hi all! We started some discussions on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/300200/ about the future of node management (registering, configuring and introspecting) in the new API, but I think it's more

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Languages vs. Scope of "OpenStack"

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > I don't think language does (or should) have anything to do with it. > ^1024 Language is what finally forced this discussion (as a prerequisite), now that we're here, lets finish the prerequisite before going back

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Nodes management in our shiny new TripleO API

On 05/19/2016 09:31 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > Hi all! > > We started some discussions on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/300200/ > about the future of node management (registering, configuring and > introspecting) in the new API, but I think it's more fair (and > convenient) to move it here.

Re: [openstack-dev] [osops-tools-monitoring][monitoring-for-openstack] Code duplication

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Simon Pasquier wrote: > Hello, > You can find the rationale in the review [1] importing m.o.f. into o.t.m. > Basically it was asked by the operators community to avoid the sprawl of > repositories. > BR, > Simon > [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Languages vs. Scope of "OpenStack"

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > The other approach is product-centric: "lower-level pieces are OpenStack > dependencies, rather than OpenStack itself". If we are missing a > lower-level piece to achieve our mission and are developing it as a

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Languages vs. Scope of "OpenStack"

On Fri, 20 May 2016, Thierry Carrez wrote: The other approach is product-centric: "lower-level pieces are OpenStack dependencies, rather than OpenStack itself". If we are missing a lower-level piece to achieve our mission and are developing it as a result, it could be developed on OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Nodes management in our shiny new TripleO API

On 05/20/2016 02:54 PM, Steven Hardy wrote: Hi Dmitry, Thanks for the detailed write-up, some comments below: On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 03:31:36PM +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: what do you propose? I would like the new TripleO mistral workflows to start following the

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] enabled convergence background

Thanks Thomas Herve, Steven Hardy and Anant Patil. Thanks team. It help me a lot. Best Regards, xiangxinyong On Fri, May 20, 2016 05:48 PM, Anant Patil wrote: > On 20-May-16 13:51, Steven Hardy wrote: >> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 09:26:46AM +0200, Thomas Herve wrote: >>> On Fri, May 20,

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] process for making decisions?

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 02:02:32PM +, Loo, Ruby wrote: > Hi, > > I think it would be good if we came up with some general guidelines wrt the > processes by which decisions are made. By ³decisions², I mean decisions that > we, as a community, will try to abide by ? > > I have noticed in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-docs] What's Up, Doc? 20 May 2016

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Lana Brindley wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I've been struck down by the dreaded flu this week, so it's been a bit > quiet around here. I have, however, crawled out from under the tissues, > throat lozenges, and episodes of Containment to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Nodes management in our shiny new TripleO API

Hi Dmitry, Thanks for the detailed write-up, some comments below: On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 03:31:36PM +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > what do you propose? > > > I would like the new TripleO mistral workflows to start following the ironic > state machine closer. Imagine the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] supporting Go

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > I am *NOT* buying that doing static linking is a progress. We're back 30 > years in the past, before the .so format. It is amazing that some of us > think it's better. It simply isn't. It's a huge regression, for package >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Languages vs. Scope of "OpenStack"

John Dickinson wrote: [...] In the same vein, if we consider lower-level projects (which often require such native optimization) as part of "OpenStack", rather than as external open source projects that should be integrated by "OpenStack", then we need a language like golang in our toolbelt.

[openstack-dev] [nova-lxd]Nova-lxd with Linuxbridge

Hi! I just have a simple question: is nova-lxd supposed to work with the Linuxbridge agent? As I see, the LXD driver creates veth interface pairs, and vif.py connects it to a normal linux bridge. However the Linuxbridge agent code scans only for tap devices. So the question is: Should the LXD

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] usage of ironic-lib

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 01:21:35PM -0700, Devananda van der Veen wrote: > On 05/16/2016 07:14 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Loo, Ruby wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> A patch to ironic-lib made me wonder about what is our supported usage of > >>

[openstack-dev] [Fuel][Plugins] custom roles need to configure the default gateway

Hello, This is a heads-up for the plugin developers because we found this issue [1] with the StackLight plugins. If your plugin targets MOS 8 and provides custom roles, you probably want to call the 'configure_default_route' task otherwise the nodes will use the Fuel node as the default gateway

Re: [openstack-dev] [osops-tools-monitoring][monitoring-for-openstack] Code duplication

Hello, You can find the rationale in the review [1] importing m.o.f. into o.t.m. Basically it was asked by the operators community to avoid the sprawl of repositories. BR, Simon [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/248352/ On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Martin Magr wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] 答复: [Heat][Glance] Can't migrate to glance v2 completely

Hi Huangtianhua, Bit more general pointers here and I respond to your exact cases inline. OpenStack community has made really clear that we must not expose backend configuration details of the services to users and we must not rely users knowing any of those details to operate in the cloud. The

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Update_port can not remove allocation from auto-addressed subnets

Hi, Currently using update_port workflow user can not remove ip addresses from auto-addressed subnets (SLAAC). It prevents me from implementing complete fix for [1]. Typically for removing ip address from port, 'fixed_ips' list is updated and ip address is cleaned up from it. But for

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Nodes management in our shiny new TripleO API

On 05/20/2016 01:44 PM, Dan Prince wrote: On Thu, 2016-05-19 at 15:31 +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: Hi all! We started some discussions on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/30020 0/ about the future of node management (registering, configuring and introspecting) in the new API, but I think it's

[openstack-dev] [nova] API changes on limit / marker / sort in Newton

There are a number of changes up for spec reviews that add parameters to LIST interfaces in Newton: * keypairs-pagination (MERGED) - https://github.com/openstack/nova-specs/blob/8d16fc11ee6d01b5a9fe1b8b7ab7fa6dff460e2a/specs/newton/approved/keypairs-pagination.rst#L2 * os-instances-actions -

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Nodes management in our shiny new TripleO API

Hi, > This sounds like an Ironic bug to me. Cleaning (wiping a disk) and > removing state that would break subsequent installations on a different > drive are different things. In TripleO I think the reason we disable > cleaning is largely because of the extra time it takes and the fact > that

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Centralize Configuration: ignore service list for newton

On 05/20/2016 11:33 AM, John Garbutt wrote: Hi, The current config template includes a list of "Services which consume this": http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/mitaka/implemented/centralize-config-options.html#quality-view I propose we drop this list from the template. I

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Nodes management in our shiny new TripleO API

On Thu, 2016-05-19 at 15:31 +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > Hi all! > > We started some discussions on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/30020 > 0/  > about the future of node management (registering, configuring and  > introspecting) in the new API, but I think it's more fair (and  > convenient)

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Centralize Configuration: ignore service list for newton

On Fri, 20 May 2016, John Garbutt wrote: I have been thinking about a possible future replacement. Two separate sample configuration files, one for the Compute node, and one for non-compute nodes (i.e. "controller" nodes). The reason for this split, is our move towards removing sensitive

Re: [openstack-dev] How to single sign on with windows authentication with Keystone

Hi I would like to share article Keystone and WebSSO: Using Active Directory Federation Services with OpenStack Keystone (http://xuctarine.blogspot.ru/2016/05/keystone-and-websso-using-active.html ). In this article you

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] supporting Go

On 05/11/2016 04:17 PM, Dean Troyer wrote: > The big difference with Go here is that the dependency work happens at > build time, not deploy/runtime in most cases. That shifts much of the > burden to people (theoretically) better suited to manage that work. I am *NOT* buying that doing static

[openstack-dev] [nova] Centralize Configuration: ignore service list for newton

Hi, The current config template includes a list of "Services which consume this": http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/mitaka/implemented/centralize-config-options.html#quality-view I propose we drop this list from the template. I am worried this is going to be hard to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Deprecated options in sample configs?

On 05/19/2016 09:18 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: On 05/17/2016 07:27 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: If config sample files are being used as a living document then that would be a reason to leave the deprecated options in there. In my experience as a cloud deployer I never once used them in

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron-lbaas] Multiple back-end support for lbaas v2

Hi. Actually, you can specify multiple providers, but these configuration directives are repeatable and are not comma-separated. That's mean you should add the another service_provider in the [service_providers] section as a separate line. And yes, you can try to pass parameter 'provider' to

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] enabled convergence background

On 20-May-16 13:51, Steven Hardy wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 09:26:46AM +0200, Thomas Herve wrote: >> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 5:46 AM, xiangxinyong wrote: >>> Hi Team, >>> >>> I noticed that heat enabled convergence. >> >> I hope that's not the case :). We haven't made

[openstack-dev] [osops-tools-monitoring][monitoring-for-openstack] Code duplication

Greetings guys, there is a duplication of code within openstack/osops-tools-monitoring and openstack/monitoring-for-openstack projects. It seems that m-o-f became part of o-t-m, but the former project wasn't deleted. I was just wandering if there is a reason for the duplication (or fork,

[openstack-dev] [neutron-lbaas] Multiple back-end support for lbaas v2

Hi all, Can I enable multiple service_providers for lbaas v2 at the same time? such as ``` service_provider=LOADBALANCER:Haproxy:neutron_lbaas.services.loadbalancer.drivers.haproxy.plugin_driver.HaproxyOnHostPluginDriver:default,

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Proposing Mauricio Lima for core reviewer

+1 Kind regards, Alicja -Original Message- From: Michał Jastrzębski [mailto:inc...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 6:41 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Proposing

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] enabled convergence background

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 09:26:46AM +0200, Thomas Herve wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 5:46 AM, xiangxinyong wrote: > > Hi Team, > > > > I noticed that heat enabled convergence. > > I hope that's not the case :). We haven't made the switch yet. We > continue to do testing,

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Is a volume always not attachable if it's 'migration_status' is 'migrating'?

Hi cinder team, When a volume's 'migration_status' is 'migrating', we've no idea whether this volume is able to attach to a server to use: IF the migration way is host-copy, it is not attachable to use, but if the migration is handling by driver, some driver's implementation can make it

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] enabled convergence background

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 5:46 AM, xiangxinyong wrote: > Hi Team, > > I noticed that heat enabled convergence. I hope that's not the case :). We haven't made the switch yet. We continue to do testing, and we're still finding issues so we won't make it until we have a good

[openstack-dev] [nova] Find out the instance availability zone before creating volume.

Hi all, it's a long time since I have opened proposal to fix bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1497253 "different availability zone for nova and cinder when AZ is not explicitly given". I know the solution is controversial, but could anyone interested give a look? To summarize what's the

[openstack-dev] [tricircle] Cross OpenStac L2 Networking Specification

Hi Team, Probably we would not be able to make any progress without completing ${subject} which is under review right now. [1] It's because: 1.Blueprint of the Tricircle is almost based on this feature at the moment. 2.Further implementation will be mostly based on this feature. 3.Our