| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2021-06-09 | |||
| 10:12:55 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: I agree that patch seems strange | |
| 10:13:19 | opendevreview | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: [DNM]Test with sqla 1.4 and try to tease out slow tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/795506 | |
| 10:13:19 | gibi | at least is needs a lot of arguing in the commit message why the author wants this | |
| 10:14:15 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: well ideally if they did want this it would be done on master first not on stable/train | |
| 10:14:24 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yes. | |
| 10:14:26 | sean-k-mooney | with either a bug or blueprint | |
| 10:14:35 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: and zuul will also vote -1 as it is not a backport | |
| 10:14:53 | gibi | so we have automatic rejection for such cahnges | |
| 10:14:55 | sean-k-mooney | what this is doing is allowing you to look up the connection details if you happen to fined a token | |
| 10:14:55 | gibi | changes | |
| 10:15:44 | sean-k-mooney | gibi: beacuase of the pep8 cherry-pick check or something else | |
| 10:15:56 | sean-k-mooney | i was not aware of sometrhing that did that automatically | |
| 10:16:04 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: yepp | |
| 10:16:14 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: we have our own script | |
| 10:16:18 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: as part of pep8 | |
| 10:16:38 | gibi | https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/tools/check-cherry-picks.sh | |
| 10:16:41 | sean-k-mooney | i tought the cherry pick script would only detect this if you had cherry-pick lines | |
| 10:16:48 | sean-k-mooney | i did not think it would run on this patch | |
| 10:17:04 | gibi | sean-k-mooney: it reject things that does not have cherry-pick lines and does not have [stable only] heading | |
| 10:17:51 | sean-k-mooney | ah echo 'Stable branch requires either cherry-pick -x headers or [stable-only] tag!' | |
| 10:17:58 | sean-k-mooney | ya | |
| 10:18:11 | sean-k-mooney | ok i did not think we had that last bit. neet | |
| 10:30:04 | swp20 | sean-k-mooney: recently, our client meet the problem that the instance's owner has no permission to get console auth token with T version. From U we have used new policy rule, so i propose this patch base on Train branch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/795496 | |
| 10:31:53 | sean-k-mooney | swp20: that cahnge does not allow them to get a console auth token | |
| 10:32:10 | sean-k-mooney | swp20: it allows them to use a token to get the connection info | |
| 10:32:57 | swp20 | we have tested this change works. | |
| 10:33:48 | sean-k-mooney | well you can do it in you policy.json without the code change but that is not what the rule is for | |
| 10:34:29 | sean-k-mooney | that is for https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=show-console-connection-information-detail#show-console-connection-information | |
| 10:36:11 | lyarwood | sean-k-mooney: the host there is the compute host right? | |
| 10:37:10 | sean-k-mooney | i think its the proxy | |
| 10:37:21 | sean-k-mooney | but it could be | |
| 10:45:13 | swp20 | sean-k-mooney: how can i do in policy.json? does the instance's own donnot has the permission? | |
| 10:49:26 | sean-k-mooney | this is what i would have used in the past https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=get-vnc-console-os-getvncconsole-action-deprecated-detail#get-vnc-console-os-getvncconsole-action-deprecated | |
| 10:49:42 | sean-k-mooney | that will give you the console url and the auth token | |
| 10:51:21 | sean-k-mooney | the newer way woudl be to use https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=create-console-detail#create-console | |
| 10:53:08 | swp20 | this is no what we want. | |
| 10:53:57 | sean-k-mooney | swp20: to override the policy in policy.json you just do "rule name":["rules"] | |
| 10:54:43 | sean-k-mooney | swp20: it is what you said your customer wanted the creaqte api will return a new auth token/url for the server console | |
| 10:56:36 | swp20 | we have two platform A and B, A platform want use the console token to visit the instance on B platform, we need the host and port with the api https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=show-console-connection-information-detail,create-console-detail#show-console-connection-information | |
| 10:57:17 | sean-k-mooney | swp20: why does A not just use the create api on b to get the url and token | |
| 10:57:25 | sean-k-mooney | swp20: is A unwaware of the server uuid | |
| 10:57:50 | swp20 | yes, A is unware of the server uuid. | |
| 10:58:52 | sean-k-mooney | i see well given the console_token is not intended to be used by normal users as a handel to identify a server im not conviced we should make that change in code | |
| 10:58:58 | swp20 | or A use no admin account. | |
| 10:59:09 | sean-k-mooney | you can do it locally on your cloud though | |
| 10:59:21 | sean-k-mooney | A presumable owns the server | |
| 10:59:24 | sean-k-mooney | correct | |
| 11:00:31 | swp20 | with the new policy rule, dose the system_reader has the permission? | |
| 11:01:09 | sean-k-mooney | in the patch you added | |
| 11:02:20 | swp20 | not in the patch. i find the rule change to SYSTEM_READER after U. | |
| 11:02:21 | sean-k-mooney | no it does no tsupport the new project scopes and roles | |
| 11:02:23 | sean-k-mooney | check_str='is_admin:True or project_id:%(project_id)s', | |
| 11:03:25 | sean-k-mooney | system_reader will not allow the owner of the token to use that endpoint no | |
| 11:03:56 | swp20 | ack, thanks. | |
| 11:04:04 | sean-k-mooney | swp20: this api endpoint was only intended to help admins debug console issues | |
| 11:04:48 | swp20 | but maybe the user has the requirement. | |
| 11:05:39 | sean-k-mooney | how does A get the console token for the server on B | |
| 11:06:06 | sean-k-mooney | the console tokens expire and are only valid for a short period of time so they are not ment to be used to identify the server | |
| 11:07:04 | sean-k-mooney | the default token time to live is 10 minutes https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#consoleauth.token_ttl | |
| 11:07:09 | swp20 | and the doc has no desciption. | |
| 11:07:58 | swp20 | i will ask the client what's his scenes. | |
| 11:08:55 | swp20 | i rememered, they just want to visit the instance through host and port. | |
| 11:09:23 | sean-k-mooney | well a normal end user shoudl not know the host on which the instnace is running | |
| 11:09:37 | sean-k-mooney | unless its a private cloud that is a pretty big security risk | |
| 11:10:11 | swp20 | yeah, it's a really a private cloud.:') | |
| 11:11:08 | sean-k-mooney | the sample policy.json is rendered here https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/sample-policy.html | |
| 11:11:57 | sean-k-mooney | they just need to put that in /etc/nova/policy.json and uncomment #"os_compute_api:os-console-auth-tokens": "rule:system_reader_api" | |
| 11:12:03 | sean-k-mooney | then update the rule | |
| 11:12:11 | swp20 | got it, thanks. | |
| 11:13:55 | sean-k-mooney | just make sure you customer is aware of the console auth token ttl and the fact that in theory the tokens could be resused | |
| 11:14:06 | sean-k-mooney | its very unlikely but it can happen | |
| 11:14:29 | swp20 | yeah, right. | |
| 11:14:44 | sean-k-mooney | if they are storing the token in a db somewhere and expecting to be able to use it days later its going to break there usecase | |
| 11:16:17 | swp20 | ack | |
| 11:17:40 | swp20 | i'll abandon this patch and talk to my customer. | |
| 12:45:35 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: requirements: Add typing-paramiko https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/795533 | |
| 12:45:47 | stephenfin | gate is down - we need that (and the related requirements fix) to unblock it ^ | |
| 12:46:24 | stephenfin | s/down/broken/ | |
| 12:49:01 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: requirements: Add types-paramiko https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/795533 | |
| 13:03:19 | lyarwood | stephenfin: Why the Depends-On? | |
| 13:03:36 | stephenfin | because we need to get it in u-c before the requirements job will pass, no? | |
| 13:06:27 | lyarwood | stephenfin: ah does that actually fail if we don't have a uc for a given test-requirement? | |
| 13:06:36 | lyarwood | TIL | |
| 13:06:39 | stephenfin | I'm pretty sure it does, yeah | |
| 13:08:33 | amodi | lyarwood: hi, can u help out with the issue in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/whitebox-tempest-plugin/+/786979, when u can. i don't have a devstack env to debug | |
| 13:08:50 | lyarwood | stephenfin: requirements-check looks like it's failing in the nova change | |
| 13:09:18 | lyarwood | ERROR: Package 'types-paramiko' is used in test-requirements.txt but not in lower-constraints.txt | |
| 13:09:30 | stephenfin | drat, will fix | |
| 13:10:09 | gibi | stephenfin: what is the way to reproduce the issue? I run tox -e mypy -r locally but it passes on nova master | |
| 13:10:10 | lyarwood | amodi: looking | |
| 13:11:26 | stephenfin | gibi: that did the trick for me. Only odd thing for me is the use of Python 3.9 | |
| 13:11:30 | stephenfin | since it's F34 | |
| 13:11:50 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: requirements: Add types-paramiko https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/795533 | |
| 13:11:55 | stephenfin | lyarwood: ^ | |
| 13:11:57 | gibi | gibizer@riverbed:~/upstream/git/nova [master] [000] [15:09:30] | |
| 13:12:01 | gibi | $ source .tox/shared/bin/activate | |
| 13:12:03 | gibi | gibizer@riverbed:~/upstream/git/nova (shared)[master] [000] [15:11:46] | |
| 13:12:07 | gibi | $ python --version | |
| 13:12:09 | gibi | I use python 3.9 too | |
| 13:12:12 | gibi | Python 3.9.2 | |