| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-03-10 | |||
| 15:43:45 | gmann | sean-k-mooney: and what we discussed now is restrict if no tenant isolcation too | |
| 15:43:45 | stephenfin | can we defer this to Xena? | |
| 15:44:01 | stephenfin | this is starting to feel like it warrants its own spec | |
| 15:44:09 | sean-k-mooney | yep so we should keep the consitent | |
| 15:44:09 | gmann | yeah may be we should. | |
| 15:44:21 | gmann | and let discuss in PTG on all cases | |
| 15:44:26 | stephenfin | given the security implications and discussion around API changes | |
| 15:44:30 | sean-k-mooney | either restic both or dont | |
| 15:44:32 | stephenfin | *changes to other APIs | |
| 15:44:44 | sean-k-mooney | when no isolation is configured for the tenant | |
| 15:44:56 | gmann | and we can discuss host info in GET server also for such project admin | |
| 15:45:03 | stephenfin | yeah, I'm in favour of the same behavior for both listing hypervisors and creating servers on a particular hypervisor | |
| 15:45:20 | gmann | yeah, same behavior is needed whatever we agreed to | |
| 15:45:24 | sean-k-mooney | gmann: getting hypervior_hostname is proably valid if you can do the hypervior list | |
| 15:46:02 | gmann | yeah, and i think we return that in PUT/REBUILD server API also which also we can discuss | |
| 15:46:48 | sean-k-mooney | it basicaly come down too this. show project admins be aware of the hypervior that there vms can run on | |
| 15:46:53 | gmann | so 1. we can update the current spec to remove the policy change 2create new spec for Xena and discuss in PTG ? | |
| 15:46:55 | sean-k-mooney | if yes then it should see it on all apis | |
| 15:47:05 | sean-k-mooney | where its relevent | |
| 15:48:01 | gmann | gibi: sean-k-mooney stephenfin ^^ hope it is ok to update spec at this stage as this is to remove the things we agreed to do | |
| 15:48:02 | sean-k-mooney | and then there is the quetion of if it should require tenatn isolation or not | |
| 15:48:08 | gmann | not on adding anything new | |
| 15:48:27 | sean-k-mooney | gmann: we can update specs at any time to reflect reality | |
| 15:48:38 | stephenfin | gmann: Yeah, I'll update the spec and add an item to the PTG to discuss this | |
| 15:48:49 | gmann | +1, thanks | |
| 15:48:50 | sean-k-mooney | gmann: this wont get moved into implemneted anyway | |
| 15:49:00 | gmann | sean-k-mooney: oh why? | |
| 15:49:03 | gibi | gmann: yeah, spec update and a new spec is OK to me | |
| 15:49:15 | sean-k-mooney | gmann: well its not done right | |
| 15:49:18 | gmann | stephenfin:gibi sean-k-mooney i can create the new xena spec for PTG | |
| 15:49:24 | gibi | gmann: thanks | |
| 15:49:28 | stephenfin | thanks | |
| 15:49:39 | sean-k-mooney | or is enough of the spec done to mark the wallby one as implemented? | |
| 15:49:55 | gibi | gmann: and If no discussion happens until the PTG on the spec then I suggest to raise this topic on the PTG too | |
| 15:49:59 | gmann | sean-k-mooney: actually that is some special case we want to handle in that spec otherwise original spec of 'standardize the hypervisor API' is done | |
| 15:50:09 | gmann | gibi: ack, make sense | |
| 15:50:14 | sean-k-mooney | oh its part of that | |
| 15:50:17 | sean-k-mooney | sorry ya | |
| 15:50:30 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I put the os-hypervisor API moderinzation bp to implemented as I got from stephenfin that the policy part is just a nice to have | |
| 15:50:33 | sean-k-mooney | so that spec can move to implmetned and then xena one for the edgecase | |
| 15:50:45 | gmann | yeah | |
| 15:50:49 | sean-k-mooney | cool | |
| 15:51:46 | gibi | OK, we are in wild agreement | |
| 15:52:30 | sean-k-mooney | it would appear so. its funny how that often looks liek an argument :) | |
| 16:00:36 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Remove policy changes from modernize-os-hypervisors-api spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/779821 | |
| 16:00:59 | stephenfin | gmann, gibi: ^ | |
| 16:01:04 | stephenfin | also added to the PTG doc | |
| 16:02:27 | gibi | stephenfin: on it | |
| 16:02:30 | gibi | and thanks | |
| 16:18:19 | gmann | stephenfin: thanks, lgtm | |
| 16:38:48 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova-specs master: Remove policy changes from modernize-os-hypervisors-api spec https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/779821 | |
| 16:55:59 | dansmith | bauzas: I never saw any replies to my comments on the rpc bump patch | |
| 16:56:08 | dansmith | bauzas: did you not notice, or just think they were all stupid? :) | |
| 16:56:12 | bauzas | dansmith: I forgot to look at it, my bad. | |
| 16:56:18 | dansmith | okay | |
| 16:56:27 | bauzas | dansmith: but I quickly saw them | |
| 16:56:32 | bauzas | reviews ftw atm | |
| 16:56:39 | dansmith | okay none of them are critical obviously | |
| 16:56:49 | bauzas | dansmith: I can look at them now while you're on | |
| 16:57:06 | bauzas | (at least once my weekly meeting is done) | |
| 16:57:27 | dansmith | okay | |
| 17:09:34 | stephenfin | gmann: Any chance you could take a look at https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778550 ? | |
| 17:09:56 | stephenfin | It's pretty late in the day, but it's a fairly simple microversion | |
| 17:12:03 | gmann | stephenfin: sure, I will check, may be tomorrow I have to go out today after noon. | |
| 17:12:15 | stephenfin | sweet, thanks :) | |
| 17:22:07 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Rename 'parameter_types.hostname' -> 'fqdn' https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778549 | |
| 17:22:09 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: api: Add support for 'hostname' parameter https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/778550 | |
| 17:28:47 | stephenfin | sean-k-mooney: okay, got to the end of the series. I see what you mean about patch ordering | |
| 17:29:01 | stephenfin | are you working on that series rn? | |
| 17:30:14 | sean-k-mooney | not yet but soon | |
| 17:30:25 | sean-k-mooney | im going to move the neutorn port one now | |
| 17:30:32 | sean-k-mooney | on top of artom change | |
| 17:30:38 | sean-k-mooney | then go back to vdpa | |
| 17:31:32 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: o/ enjoy your evening | |
| 17:32:02 | stephenfin | cool, mind if I take a quick swing at it? | |
| 17:32:12 | stephenfin | I think I know what you're going for | |
| 17:32:21 | sean-k-mooney | if you want go for it | |
| 17:33:23 | sean-k-mooney | i tried to break it out at first to be logicly split but then i found later when i got the real hardware i need to fix some thing and some of those fixed end in the last patch | |
| 17:33:37 | sean-k-mooney | i would like to bring those fix to the correct patch | |
| 17:38:06 | bauzas | dansmith: okay, I looked at all your comments and thanks for them | |
| 17:38:31 | bauzas | dansmith: you made a great point, which is I made extra work for free when trying to continue to support 5.0 | |
| 17:38:35 | bauzas | instead of 5.12 | |
| 17:38:58 | dansmith | bauzas: well, not "for free", it clearly cost you something :D | |
| 17:39:14 | bauzas | dansmith: I probably misunderstood that we were pinning to the least supported version from all computes, which is *not* 5.0 | |
| 17:39:16 | dansmith | (but I know what you mean) | |
| 17:39:43 | dansmith | bauzas: well, I think you aren't able to faithfully support 5.0 anyway, was my point | |
| 17:39:56 | bauzas | yeah | |
| 17:40:22 | bauzas | the point is, we're entering the RC period and touching my change for removing stuff could require me some further work | |
| 17:40:52 | bauzas | so maybe let's just pretend we can support 5.0, which is impossible anyway | |
| 17:41:01 | dansmith | yes, although this is pretty much the time to be doing that | |
| 17:41:04 | dansmith | but as you wish | |
| 17:41:28 | bauzas | I'll first reply to the other comments and do a quick respin | |
| 17:41:37 | dansmith | ack | |
| 17:41:39 | bauzas | and if we have time, I can look at removing the unnecessary bits | |
| 17:42:01 | bauzas | which should simplify my change | |
| 17:42:09 | bauzas | but here, baby steps | |
| 17:42:17 | bauzas | to secure the RPC bump anyway | |
| 17:42:34 | dansmith | sounds good | |
| 17:43:48 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: since your here and talking about this topic | |
| 17:44:00 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: when can we do ovo major version bumps | |