[openstack-dev] [Heat] Template Testing environment

Hi All, I asked on IRC for some guidance on what and how I would be able to test templates for the changes to the heat templates repo. Is there a specific localrc file configuration that I could use for Devstack so that IO can get all the services I need to be able to run tests against my

[openstack-dev] [Nova][Scheduler]

Hello, I am looking for some suggestions. lets say i have multiple compute nodes, Pool-A has 5 nodes and Pool-B has 4 nodes categorized based on some property. Now there is request for new instance, i always want this instance to be placed on any compute in Pool-A and not in Pool-B. What would be

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][cinder][barbican] Why is Cinder creating symmetric keys in Barbican for use with encrypted volumes?

On 31-05-17 20:06:01, Farr, Kaitlin M. wrote: >> IMHO for now we are better off storing a secret passphrase in Barbican >> for use with these encrypted volumes, would there be any objections to >> this? Are there actual plans to use a symmetric key stored in Barbican >> to directly encrypt and

Re: [openstack-dev] [mogan] Architecture diagrams

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 4:06 AM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > Hi mogan folks, > > I was doing some source code examination of mogan and it peaked my > interest in how it all is connected together. In part I see there is a > state machine, some taskflow usage, some wsgi usage that

Re: [openstack-dev] [panko] dropping hbase driver support

+1 Hanxi Liu IRC(lhx_) On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 1:17 AM, gordon chung wrote: > hi, > > as all of you know, we moved all storage out of ceilometer so it is > handles only data generation and normalisation. there seems to be very > little contribution to panko which handles metadata

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

I recalled that UC is inviting WG chairs to join the UC IRC meeting to share/provide WG updates on high level status/activities? Is this something similar? Should the WG chair attend the UC meeting instead of setting up another separate meeting? On Wednesday, May 31, 2017, MCCABE, JAMEY A

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 04:24:14PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> On 2017-05-31 17:18:54 +0100 (+0100), Graham Hayes wrote: >> [...] >> > Trademark programs are trademark programs - we should have a unified >> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone] Cockroachdb for Keystone Multi-master

On 05/30/2017 09:06 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 05/30/2017 05:07 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2017-05-30 14:52:01 -0400: Sorry for the delay in getting back on this... comments inline. On 05/18/2017 06:13 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: Hello fellow OpenStackers, For

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 04:24:14PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-05-31 17:18:54 +0100 (+0100), Graham Hayes wrote: > [...] > > Trademark programs are trademark programs - we should have a unified > > process for all of them. Let's not make the same mistakes again by > > creating classes

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests (was: more tempest plugins)

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 03:45:52PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-05-31 15:22:59 + (+), Jeremy Stanley wrote: > > On 2017-05-31 09:43:11 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > > [...] > > > it's news to me that they're considering reversing course. If the > > > QA team isn't going

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] [tc] [all] more tempest plugins (was Re: [tc] [all] TC Report 22)

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 03:22:59PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-05-31 09:43:11 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > [...] > > it's news to me that they're considering reversing course. If the > > QA team isn't going to continue, we'll need to figure out what > > that means and

Re: [openstack-dev] [doc][ptls][all] Documentation publishing future

Hi Alex, As you know I am a strong proponent of moving the docs into the project team repositories [1]. Personally I am in favor of pulling the Band-Aids off and doing option 1. I think centralizing the documentation under one tree and consolidating the build into one job has benefits.

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][horizon] FWaaS/VPNaaS dashboard split out from horizon

> -Original Message- > From: Akihiro Motoki [mailto:amot...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 6:13 AM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List > Subject: [openstack-dev] [neutron][horizon] FWaaS/VPNaaS dashboard split > out from horizon > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Tripleo] deploy software on Openstack controller on the Overcloud

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Dnyaneshwar Pawar wrote: > Hi Alex, > > Currently we have puppet modules[0] to configure our software which has > components on Openstack Controller, Cinder node and Nova node. > As per document[1] we successfully tried out role

[openstack-dev] [congress] policy monitoring panel design

Here's a quick & rough mock-up I put up based on the discussions at Atlanta PTG. https://wireframepro.mockflow.com/view/congress-policy-monitor Anyone can view and comment. To make changes, please sign-up and email me to get access.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [keystone][nova][cinder][glance][neutron][horizon][policy] defining admin-ness

I took a stab at working through the API a bit more and I've capture that information in the spec [0]. Rendered version is available, too [1]. [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/464763/ [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][ptls][all] Potential Queens Goal: Migrate Off Paste

I agree, this would be a good thing to do and something which will definitely improve the overall ease of upgrades. We already have two Queens goals though; do we want to add a third? -amrith P.S. I'd happily volunteer doing this, with a real end user benefit, over the current tempest shuffle

[openstack-dev] [tc][ptl][all] Potential Queens Goal: Continuing Python 3.5+ Support

Hello everyone, For this thread we will be discussing continuing Python 3.5+ support. Emilien who has been helping with coordinating our efforts here with Pike can probably add more here, but glancing at our goals document [1] it looks like we have a lot of unanswered projects’ status, but mostly

[openstack-dev] [tc][ptls][all] Potential Queens Goal: Migrate Off Paste

Hello everyone, As part of our community wide goals process [1], we will discuss the potential goals that came out of the forum session in Boston [2]. These discussions will aid the TC in making a final decision of what goals the community will work towards in the Queens release. For this thread

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests

I've been following this discussion from a safe distance on the mailing list, and I just caught up on the IRC conversation as well. It was my understanding that if a project had tests that were going to be run for the purposes of determination whether something met the standards of "OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][cinder][barbican] Why is Cinder creating symmetric keys in Barbican for use with encrypted volumes?

Lee, a few thoughts on your previous email. Many of the details I think you already know, but I'm clarifying for posterity's sake: > However the only supported disk encryption formats on the front-end at > present are plain (dm-crypt) and LUKS, neither of which use the supplied > key

[openstack-dev] [mogan] Architecture diagrams

Hi mogan folks, I was doing some source code examination of mogan and it peaked my interest in how it all is connected together. In part I see there is a state machine, some taskflow usage, some wsgi usage that looks like parts of it are inspired(?) by various other projects. That got me

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [Scheduler]

On 05/31/2017 09:49 AM, Narendra Pal Singh wrote: Hello, lets say i have multiple compute nodes, Pool-A has 5 nodes and Pool-B has 4 nodes categorized based on some property. Now there is request for new instance, i always want this instance to be placed on any compute in Pool-A. What would

[openstack-dev] [gnocchi] regional incoming storage targets

here's a scenario: i'd like aggregates stored centrally like it does currently with ceph/swift/s3 drivers but i want to collect data from many different regions spanning globe. they can all hit the same incoming storage but: - that will be a hell of a lot of load - single incoming storage

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Onboarding rooms postmortem, what did you do, what worked, lessons learned

On 2017-05-19 09:22:07 -0400 (-0400), Sean Dague wrote: [...] > the project, I hosted the onboarding session for the Infrastructure team. For various logistical reasons discussed on the planning thread before the PTG, it was a shared session with many other "horizontal" teams (QA, Requirements,

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] [nova] How to provide additional options to NFS backend?

On 5/31/2017 12:02 PM, Jiri Suchomel wrote: V Wed, 31 May 2017 11:34:20 -0400 Eric Harney napsáno: On 05/25/2017 05:51 AM, Jiri Suchomel wrote: Hi, it seems to me that the way of adding extra NFS options to the cinder backend is somewhat confusing. ... This has gotten

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

Thanks John for the intro. I believe cryptography is supported by pypy today. Just did a "pip install cryptography" using an older version of pypy, pypy2-v5.6.0, with no error. This package has been downloaded > 13 millions of times based on pypy package tracking site:

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

> Just a couple things (I don't think it changes the decision made). > > Cryptography does at least claim to support PyPy (see > https://pypi.python.org/pypi/cryptography/ trove identifiers), so > possibly a bug on their end that should get filed? > > Also, our user clients should probably run

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

Working group (WG) chairs or delegates, please enter your name (and WG name) and what times you could meet at this poll: https://beta.doodle.com/poll/6k36zgre9ttciwqz#table As background and to share progress: * We started and generally confirmed the desire to have a regular cross WG

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] Blueprint process question

Hey Rob, Just thought I’d check in on whether Horizon team has had a chance to review the following blueprint: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/vitrage-alarm-counts-in-topnavbar The blueprint in Vitrage which the above Horizon blueprint depends on has been approved by Vitrage

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] [nova] How to provide additional options to NFS backend?

V Wed, 31 May 2017 11:34:20 -0400 Eric Harney napsáno: > On 05/25/2017 05:51 AM, Jiri Suchomel wrote: > > Hi, > > it seems to me that the way of adding extra NFS options to the > > cinder backend is somewhat confusing. > > > > ... > This has gotten a bit more confusing than

Re: [openstack-dev] [murano][barbican] Encrypting sensitive properties

As long as this integration is optional (i.e. no barbican — no encryption) It feels ok to me. We have a very similar integration with congress, yet you can deploy murano with or without it. As for the way to convey this, I believe metadata attributes were designed to answer use-cases like this

Re: [openstack-dev] [Tripleo] deploy software on Openstack controller on the Overcloud

Hi Alex, Currently we have puppet modules[0] to configure our software which has components on Openstack Controller, Cinder node and Nova node. As per document[1] we successfully tried out role specific configuration[2]. So, does it mean that if we have an overcloud image with our packages

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests

On 2017-05-31 17:18:54 +0100 (+0100), Graham Hayes wrote: [...] > Trademark programs are trademark programs - we should have a unified > process for all of them. Let's not make the same mistakes again by > creating classes of projects / programs. I do not want this to be > a distinction as we move

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

On 31 May 2017, at 5:34, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 05/31/2017 06:39 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: >> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 06:37:02AM -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: >>> We had a discussion a few months back around what to do for cryptography >>> since pycrypto is basically dead [1]. After some

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests

On 31/05/17 16:45, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-05-31 15:22:59 + (+), Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> On 2017-05-31 09:43:11 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: >> [...] >>> it's news to me that they're considering reversing course. If the >>> QA team isn't going to continue, we'll need to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone] Cockroachdb for Keystone Multi-master

> -Original Message- > From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 12:00 PM > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone] Cockroachdb for Keystone Multi-master > > On 05/31/2017 02:14 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > > Either

[openstack-dev] [gnocchi][collectd-ceilometer-plugin][ceilometer][rally] Gates with gnocchi+devstack will break

Hi, If you're consuming Gnocchi via its devstack in the gate, you'll need to change that soon. As the repository has been moved to GitHub and the infra team not wanting to depend on GitHub (external) repositories, you'll need to set up Gnocchi via pip. I've started doing the work for Ceilometer

[openstack-dev] [monasca] Monasca at PTG in Denver

Hi, I wanted to ask who of you would be interested in attending dedicated Monasca sessions during the next Project Teams Gathering in Denver, September 11-15, 2017 [1]. The team room would probably be booked for one or two days. Alternatively we could organize the remote mid-cycle meeting, as

Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone] Cockroachdb for Keystone Multi-master

On 05/31/2017 02:14 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: Either way, it should be much simpler to manage slave lag than to deal with a Galera cluster that won't accept any writes at all because it can't get quorum. Would CockroachDB be any better at achieving quorum? Genuinely curious. :) Best, -jay

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuxi][kuryr] Where to commit codes for Fuxi-golang

Please find my replies inline. Best regards, Hongbin From: Spyros Trigazis [mailto:strig...@gmail.com] Sent: May-30-17 9:56 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [fuxi][kuryr] Where to commit codes for Fuxi-golang On 30 May 2017 at

[openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests (was: more tempest plugins)

On 2017-05-31 15:22:59 + (+), Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-05-31 09:43:11 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > [...] > > it's news to me that they're considering reversing course. If the > > QA team isn't going to continue, we'll need to figure out what > > that means and potentially

Re: [openstack-dev] [EXTERNAL] Re: [TripleO] custom configuration to overcloud fails second time

Hi Ben, On 5/31/17, 8:06 PM, "Ben Nemec" > wrote: I think we would need to see what your custom config templates look like as well. Custom config templates: http://paste.openstack.org/show/64/ Also note that it's generally not

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] [nova] How to provide additional options to NFS backend?

On 05/25/2017 05:51 AM, Jiri Suchomel wrote: > Hi, > it seems to me that the way of adding extra NFS options to the cinder > backend is somewhat confusing. > > 1. There is nfs_mount_options in cinder config file [1] > > 2. Then I can put my options to the nfs_shares_config file - that > it

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

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 11:11 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: > On 05/30/2017 04:08 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: >> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Matthew Thode >> wrote: >>> We have a problem in requirements that projects that don't have the >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] [tc] [all] more tempest plugins (was Re: [tc] [all] TC Report 22)

On 2017-05-31 09:43:11 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: [...] > it's news to me that they're considering reversing course. If the > QA team isn't going to continue, we'll need to figure out what > that means and potentially find another group to do it. I wasn't there for the discussion, but it

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

On Wed, May 31, 2017, at 07:39 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 09:47:37AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Monty Taylor's message of 2017-05-31 07:34:03 -0500: > > > On 05/31/2017 06:39 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 06:37:02AM -0500, Sean

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 09:47:37AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Monty Taylor's message of 2017-05-31 07:34:03 -0500: > > On 05/31/2017 06:39 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > > > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 06:37:02AM -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: > > >> > > >> I am not aware of anyone using

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][kolla][stable][security][infra][all] guidelines for managing releases of binary artifacts

Doug, Thanks for the resolution. It is well written and sets appropriate guidelines. I was expecting something terrible – I guess I shouldn’t have expectations ahead of a resolution. Apologies for being a jerk on the ml. Nice work. I left some commentary in the review and left a vote of -1

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] custom configuration to overcloud fails second time

I think we would need to see what your custom config templates look like as well. Also note that it's generally not recommended to drop environment files from your deploy command unless you explicitly want to stop applying them. So if you applied myconfig_1.yaml and then later want to apply

Re: [openstack-dev] Changing project schemas in patches; upgrade implications

Thx Monty, jroll, smcginnis, zzzeek_ ... -amrith -- Amrith Kumar Phone: +1-978-563-9590 On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 05/31/2017 08:51 AM, Amrith Kumar wrote: > >> This email thread relates to[1], a change that aims to improve cross-SQL >>

[openstack-dev] [qa] No QA meeting tomorrow 01/06/2017 9.00UTC

Hi All, As most of the QA members are in Open Source Summit, Tokyo, I propose to cancel tomorrow (01/06/2017 9.00UTC) QA meeting. -gmann __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

Re: [openstack-dev] Changing project schemas in patches; upgrade implications

On 05/31/2017 08:51 AM, Amrith Kumar wrote: This email thread relates to[1], a change that aims to improve cross-SQL support in project schemas. I want to explicitly exclude the notion of getting rid of support for PostgreSQL in the underlying project schemas, a topic that was discussed at

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuxi][kuryr] Where to commit codes for Fuxi-golang

Hi, Spyros: Recently, Rexray can supply volume for Docker by integrating Cinder. It is great! However, comparing to Fuxi, Rexray is a little heavier. Because Rexray must depend on Libstorage to communicate with Cinder. Fuxi-golang is just a new project which re-implements Fuxi in go

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [keystone][nova][cinder][glance][neutron][horizon][policy] defining admin-ness

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 05/26/2017 10:44 AM, Lance Bragstad wrote: > > > Interesting - I guess the way I was thinking about it was on a per-token > > basis, since today you can't have a single token represent multiple > > scopes. Would it be

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova][os-brick] Testing for proposed iSCSI OS-Brick code

On 5/31/2017 6:58 AM, Gorka Eguileor wrote: Hi, As some of you may know I've been working on improving iSCSI connections on OpenStack to make them more robust and prevent them from leaving leftovers on attach/detach operations. There are a couple of posts [1][2] going in more detail, but a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] revised structure of the heat-templates repository. Suggestions

Hi, On 24.05.17 18:43, Zane Bitter wrote: On 19/05/17 11:00, Lance Haig wrote: Hi, As we know the heat-templates repository has become out of date in some respects and also has been difficult to be maintained from a community perspective. For me the repository is quiet confusing with

[openstack-dev] [neutron] neutron-lib impact: use plugin common constants from neutron-lib

If your project uses the constants from neutron.plugins.common.constants please read on. Many of the common plugin constants from neutron are now in neutron-lib [1] and we're ready to consume them neutron [2]. Suggested actions: - If your project uses any rehomed constants [1], please update

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Why don't we unbind ports or terminate volume connections on shelve offload?

On 4/13/2017 11:45 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: This came up in the nova/cinder meeting today, but I can't for the life of me think of why we don't unbind ports or terminate the connection volumes when we shelve offload an instance from a compute host. When you unshelve, if the instance was

Re: [openstack-dev] [OSC][ironic][mogan][nova] mogan and nova co-existing

On 05/31/2017 01:31 AM, Zhenguo Niu wrote: On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Ed Leafe > wrote: On May 30, 2017, at 9:36 PM, Zhenguo Niu > wrote: > as placement is not splitted out from nova

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] revised structure of the heat-templates repository. Suggestions

Hi Zane, On 24.05.17 18:14, Zane Bitter wrote: On 22/05/17 12:49, Lance Haig wrote: I also asked the other day if there is a list of heat version matched to Openstack version and I was told that there is not. You mean like

[openstack-dev] Changing project schemas in patches; upgrade implications

This email thread relates to[1], a change that aims to improve cross-SQL support in project schemas. I want to explicitly exclude the notion of getting rid of support for PostgreSQL in the underlying project schemas, a topic that was discussed at the summit[2]. In this change, the author (Thomas

[openstack-dev] [Nova] [Scheduler]

Hello, lets say i have multiple compute nodes, Pool-A has 5 nodes and Pool-B has 4 nodes categorized based on some property. Now there is request for new instance, i always want this instance to be placed on any compute in Pool-A. What would be best approach to address this situation? --

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] [tc] [all] more tempest plugins (was Re: [tc] [all] TC Report 22)

On 31/05/17 09:43, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2017-05-31 11:22:50 +0100: On Wed, 31 May 2017, Graham Hayes wrote: On 30/05/17 19:09, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2017-05-30 18:16:25 +0100: Note that this goal only applies to

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

Excerpts from Monty Taylor's message of 2017-05-31 07:34:03 -0500: > On 05/31/2017 06:39 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 06:37:02AM -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: > >> We had a discussion a few months back around what to do for cryptography > >> since pycrypto is basically dead

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] [tc] [all] more tempest plugins (was Re: [tc] [all] TC Report 22)

Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2017-05-31 11:22:50 +0100: > On Wed, 31 May 2017, Graham Hayes wrote: > > On 30/05/17 19:09, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >> Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2017-05-30 18:16:25 +0100: > >>> Note that this goal only applies to tempest _plugins_. Projects > >>>

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] custom configuration to overcloud fails second time

Hi TripleO Experts, I performed following steps - 1. openstack overcloud deploy --templates -e myconfig_1.yaml 2. openstack overcloud deploy --templates -e myconfig_2.yaml Step 1 Successfully applied custom configuration to the overcloud. Step 2 completed successfully but custom

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] [tc] [all] more tempest plugins (was Re: [tc] [all] TC Report 22)

On 31/05/17 11:22, Chris Dent wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017, Graham Hayes wrote: >> On 30/05/17 19:09, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2017-05-30 18:16:25 +0100: Note that this goal only applies to tempest _plugins_. Projects which have their tests in the

[openstack-dev] [neutron][horizon] FWaaS/VPNaaS dashboard split out from horizon

Hi all, As discussed last month [1], we agree that each neutron-related dashboard has its own repository. I would like to move this forward on FWaaS and VPNaaS as the horizon team plans to split them out as horizon plugins. A couple of questions hit me. (1) launchpad project Do we create a new

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible][security] Rename openstack-ansible-security role?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 05/23/2017 12:23 PM, Major Hayden wrote: > I'll see if we can move forward with 'ansible-hardening' and keep everyone > updated! :) The repo is up and ready to go: https://github.com/openstack/ansible-hardening There are some patches

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] custom configuration to overcloud fails second time

Hi TripleO Experts, I performed following steps - 1. openstack overcloud deploy --templates -e myconfig_1.yaml 2. openstack overcloud deploy --templates -e myconfig_2.yaml Step 1 Successfully applied custom configuration to the overcloud. Step 2 completed successfully but custom

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

On 05/31/2017 06:39 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 06:37:02AM -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: We had a discussion a few months back around what to do for cryptography since pycrypto is basically dead [1]. After some discussion, at least on the Cinder project, we decided the best

[openstack-dev] [cinder][nova][os-brick] Testing for proposed iSCSI OS-Brick code

Hi, As some of you may know I've been working on improving iSCSI connections on OpenStack to make them more robust and prevent them from leaving leftovers on attach/detach operations. There are a couple of posts [1][2] going in more detail, but a good summary would be that to fix this issue we

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 06:37:02AM -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: > We had a discussion a few months back around what to do for cryptography > since pycrypto is basically dead [1]. After some discussion, at least on > the Cinder project, we decided the best way forward was to use the > cryptography

[openstack-dev] [requirements] Do we care about pypy for clients (broken by cryptography)

We had a discussion a few months back around what to do for cryptography since pycrypto is basically dead [1]. After some discussion, at least on the Cinder project, we decided the best way forward was to use the cryptography package instead, and work has been done to completely remove pycrypto

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

[horizon] django-openstack-auth - blocking django - intermediary https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469420 is up to release django_openstack_auth. Sorry for the delays. Rob __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for

[openstack-dev] [qa] [tc] [all] more tempest plugins (was Re: [tc] [all] TC Report 22)

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Graham Hayes wrote: On 30/05/17 19:09, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2017-05-30 18:16:25 +0100: Note that this goal only applies to tempest _plugins_. Projects which have their tests in the core of tempest have nothing to do. I wonder if it

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] mount ceph block from an instance

Hello, That was indeed my suggestion. The alternative would be to make sure your ceph can be routed through your public network. But it’s not my infrastructure, I don’t know what you store as data, etc… In either case, you’re making possible for your tenants to access a part of your infra

[openstack-dev] [neutron] tempest failures when deploying neutron-server in wsgi with apache

Hey folks, I've been playing with deploying Neutron in WSGI with Apache and Tempest tests fail on spawning Nova server when creating Neutron ports:

Re: [openstack-dev] [devstack] systemd + ENABLED_SERVICES + user_init_file

On 11.05.2017 15:56, Markus Zoeller wrote: > I'm working on a nova live-migration hook which configures and starts > the nova-serialproxy service, runs a subset of tempest tests, and tears > down the previously started service. > >https://review.openstack.org/#/c/347471/47 > > After the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 22

On 30/05/17 19:09, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2017-05-30 18:16:25 +0100: >> >> There's no TC meeting this week. Thierry did a second weekly status >> report[^1]. There will be a TC meeting next week (Tuesday, 6th June >> at 20:00 UTC) with the intention of

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

On 31 May 2017, 15:08 +0700, Thierry Carrez , wrote: > > > This has hit us with the mistral and tripleo projects particularly > > (tagged in the title). They disallow pbr-3.0.0 and in the case of > > mistral sqlalchemy updates. > > > > [mistral] > > mistral - blocking

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 22

On 30/05/17 18:16, Chris Dent wrote: > > There's no TC meeting this week. Thierry did a second weekly status > report[^1]. There will be a TC meeting next week (Tuesday, 6th June > at 20:00 UTC) with the intention of discussing the proposals about > postgreSQL (of which more below). Here are my

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

Matthew Thode wrote: > We have a problem in requirements that projects that don't have the > cycle-with-intermediary release model (most of the cycle-with-milestones > model) don't get integrated with requirements until the cycle is fully > done. This causes a few problems. > [...] Makes sense.

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squad Meeting Summary (week 21) - Devmode OVB, RDO Cloud and config management

On 30.5.2017 23:03, Emilien Macchi wrote: On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Attila Darazs wrote: If the topics below interest you and you want to contribute to the discussion, feel free to join the next meeting: Time: Thursdays, 14:30-15:30 UTC Place:

Re: [openstack-dev] [L2-Gateway] Query on redundant configuration of OpenStack's L2 gateway

Hi Ricardo, Thanks very much for your help. I've checked the file you shared and will contact them. BR, Ran Xiao -Original Message- From: Ricardo Noriega De Soto [mailto:rnori...@redhat.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 6:50 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage

Re: [openstack-dev] [ovs-discuss] OpenStack and OVN integration is failing on multi-node physical machines.(probably a bug)

Hi Pranab, Request to not drop the mailing list Please see below for comments. On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:30 AM, pranab boruah wrote: > Thanks Numan for the reply. I modified the system service script of > neutron server and made sure that it starts only after

Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone] Cockroachdb for Keystone Multi-master

Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2017-05-30 21:06:59 -0400: > On 05/30/2017 05:07 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > > Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2017-05-30 14:52:01 -0400: > >> Sorry for the delay in getting back on this... comments inline. > >> > >> On 05/18/2017 06:13 PM, Adrian Turjak