Earlier  
Posted Nick Remark
#openstack-nova - 2020-10-29
12:10:09 elod thx gibi, I was just about to comment that 'it looks OK to me, but I would ask for other core members to review it' :)
12:48:57 elod sean-k-mooney: a minor thing: I don't want to merge this with your -1 on it o:) -- https://review.opendev.org/#/c/750925/
12:50:18 sean-k-mooney elod: oh ill change that we talked about it on the master version
12:51:23 sean-k-mooney i dont really like the change sicne we have never used it for lower constraitns and apparently that is why it was renamed but its was not enought for me to -2 on master and other were happy so its fine
12:52:01 sean-k-mooney elod: +1 now
12:53:24 sean-k-mooney elod: this was the master version https://review.opendev.org/#/c/756135/
12:53:48 sean-k-mooney it looks like the review bot version is not a cherry pick but a stable only patch
12:54:21 sean-k-mooney but for something this trivail im not sure we care too much that its stable only
12:59:54 openstackgerrit Andrey Volkov proposed openstack/nova master: Functional test test_boot_reschedule_with_proper_pci_device_count https://review.opendev.org/760354
13:08:19 kashyap lyarwood: The libvirt/QEMU folks are rushing hither and thither w/ KVM Forum thing in flight; I'm still tryin to get the right eyes on this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1901739
13:08:19 openstack Launchpad bug 1901739 in OpenStack Compute (nova) " libvirt.libvirtError: internal error: missing block job data for disk 'vda'" [High,Confirmed]
13:08:52 kashyap lyarwood: Peter Krempa would be the right one, based on my Git analysis; but it's probly a holiday in Czech
13:10:25 tosky kashyap: it was yesterday
13:10:48 kashyap tosky: Oh, sorry. Let me check w/ him again, then :)
13:10:51 kashyap tosky: Thank you
13:11:27 tosky but then people may have used that for longer holidays :)
13:12:01 lyarwood kashyap: ack thanks
13:58:48 lyarwood anyone having issues pushing new patchsets to nova-specs?
14:27:24 elod sean-k-mooney: thanks, I'll +2 then :)
15:03:11 melwitt gibi, elod: thank you both for the reviews! so much appreciated, I know that was a tough one. please lmk if there is anything I can review for you. I will fix the nits in the bottom patch
15:08:41 melwitt lyarwood: easy review for the cherry pick check fix https://review.opendev.org/759118 (it's blocking my stable-only patch, need it back to queens)
15:13:01 openstackgerrit melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: [stable-only] Add functional test for bug 1731668 https://review.opendev.org/756636
15:13:01 openstack bug 1731668 in OpenStack Compute (nova) queens "placement: claim allocations fails with IndexError in _ensure_lookup_table_entry" [Low,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1731668 - Assigned to melanie witt (melwitt)
15:13:02 openstackgerrit melanie witt proposed openstack/nova stable/queens: [stable-only] Use a separate transaction for reading after race https://review.opendev.org/756637
15:17:05 lyarwood melwitt: ack I'll look shortly
15:18:17 melwitt thanks
15:39:56 sean-k-mooney johnthetubaguy: so i would need to find it again but there is a fuse module that allows you to mount http directoes as a local file system
15:40:25 sean-k-mooney so the config drive alternitve was basically mounting metadata on the host and exposing it via cephfs
15:40:51 sean-k-mooney allow a config driver style approch without a config drive for guests without networking or whatever
15:42:06 sean-k-mooney the other cyborg like storage usecause weas using cyborg or something else to manage local storage on the host that can be exposed as fast epmeral storage withoug using the falvor epmeral option
15:42:37 sean-k-mooney that would only be useful if we had the ablity to have multiple device profiles or have a --device attach/detach
15:43:07 sean-k-mooney so right now im not proposing the cyborg approch since you cant contole it outside the flavor
15:43:17 sean-k-mooney also i have other more important things
15:51:01 sean-k-mooney but ya i have wanted to have a cyborg lvm driver for a while that we could use for local storage and testing in the gate since we can test programablity by just downloading the glance image to the volume.
16:03:11 openstackgerrit Merged openstack/os-vif stable/victoria: Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/victoria https://review.opendev.org/750925
16:21:19 bauzas lyarwood: (14:58:48) lyarwood: anyone having issues pushing new patchsets to nova-specs?
16:21:37 bauzas lyarwood: oh, are you sure you use SSH over gerrit and not HTTPS ?
17:01:00 legochen hi nova experts, I’d like to understand why nova doesn’t provide provide access control for AZ like what network RBAC does :)
17:01:34 lyarwood bauzas: ssh://lyarwood@review.opendev.org:29418/openstack/nova-specs.git that's the remote it's trying to push to
17:01:38 sean-k-mooney legochen: AZ are just tags on aggreates
17:01:52 sean-k-mooney legochen: you can restrict aggeates to tenatns seperatly
17:02:23 sean-k-mooney legochen: so you kindo of can do this but no one has really asked for it before
17:02:25 bauzas legochen: you have policies on AZs....
17:02:39 sean-k-mooney bauzas: not to filter the list of azs
17:02:56 sean-k-mooney bauzas: e.g. you cant just retrun the list of azs you can boot too
17:03:24 sean-k-mooney you can restict who can list them or pass them but that it with policy
17:03:24 bauzas sean-k-mooney: really? https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/compute/?expanded=get-availability-zone-information-detail#availability-zones-os-availability-zone
17:03:28 legochen For example, we use AZ to group hypervisors for multiple different environments. And we only allow A users to use environment A, B users to use environment B.
17:03:45 bauzas legochen: then use aggregate metadata
17:03:54 bauzas lyarwood: looks legit
17:04:10 bauzas lyarwood: I was planning to bump on F33 tonight, will let you know
17:04:40 sean-k-mooney legochen you can do that with https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#scheduler.limit_tenants_to_placement_aggregate
17:04:56 sean-k-mooney and https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#scheduler.placement_aggregate_required_for_tenants
17:04:56 legochen yes, but the user experience is not so good for that case as they still can see that AZ listed. And when they specify that AZ to create VM, no errors will promot immediately.
17:05:05 legochen the error happens in scheduling step.
17:05:24 legochen users hard to aware of that.
17:05:37 bauzas anyway, bailing out, wanting to live the 3 last hours before the lockdown out of home
17:05:59 sean-k-mooney legochen: yes that is true we could maybe filter based on the other meatadata
17:06:10 sean-k-mooney the only way to do that today is to add custom midelware
17:06:29 sean-k-mooney but you could propose a new feature for it. its not a bug that it does not do it today however
17:07:34 sean-k-mooney legochen: filtering az by availablity would be an api change and would need a spec
17:07:58 sean-k-mooney legochen: normally you would do it via host aggreates and then tell your users to not specify an az
17:08:08 sean-k-mooney legochen: with aggreates you can make it transparent
17:08:33 sean-k-mooney az are really ment to be useable by all users
17:10:13 legochen As OpenStack has the ability to provide multi-tenancy use case. But, seems hard to do access-control for resources when we use only one control plane.
17:11:09 sean-k-mooney legochen: well the point is you shoudl not be doing access contol via AZs
17:11:20 sean-k-mooney you shoudl be doing that with host aggreates
17:11:23 legochen thanks sean for the information. I’m still new to openstack, this is my first week to join openstack IRC. not that sure the process to discuss the requirements or features.
17:12:08 sean-k-mooney AZs in openstack are very different the AZs in aws or other cloud plathforms
17:12:33 sean-k-mooney they are really just a host aggreate with a metadta key set to give them an az name
17:12:56 melwitt yeah, AZ are a user-facing grouping mechanism
17:12:56 sean-k-mooney as a result we dont really have a way to eaislly add rbac style filtering on them
17:13:45 sean-k-mooney it could be done but partioning of the cloud is ment to be somethign the operator know about rather then the user
17:13:49 melwitt "host aggregates" are the access-control-based counterparts that nova uses underneath. and an AZ can be composed of one or more host aggregates
17:13:58 legochen I have came up with this doc - I’m going to use domain to manage differet kind of users. I’m looking for a feature support that can do access control by “domain” level instead of only by “project” level. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Cv3FB3HLc70o4EcFh9aLxzPVszRgulkADnmJxmT65a8/edit#
17:14:28 sean-k-mooney legochen: this has come up before
17:14:33 sean-k-mooney last cycle
17:14:49 sean-k-mooney i can recal exactly what we discussed but nova has no concept of a domain
17:15:01 sean-k-mooney legochen: domain exist only in keystone not other services
17:15:12 melwitt legochen: here is a helpful doc that explains AZ vs host aggregate https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/admin/aggregates.html
17:16:11 legochen sean-k-mooney: legochen: domain exist only in keystone not other services. <= but, have future plan for other services for supporting that?
17:16:32 sean-k-mooney legochen: no
17:16:41 sean-k-mooney not that im aware of
17:18:12 legochen oh no…….hmm, just thinking if OpenStack could support both doamin/project based access control, it really add more flexibility for OpenStack admin to manage multiple organizations :)
17:18:27 sean-k-mooney the best solution i can think off quickly would be to use https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/reference/isolate-aggregates.html
17:18:58 sean-k-mooney and then add a prefilter to translate a users domain into a CUSTOM_DOMAIN_<domain> trait
17:19:41 sean-k-mooney legochen: it would be a lot of work to do and it might cause issue with keystone federation if all service had to support domain directly
17:20:11 sean-k-mooney using isolated aggreate with a prefilter to do the domain to trait traslation would be a very small change
17:20:26 sean-k-mooney and it would work i think in most cases
17:21:40 sean-k-mooney its basically what https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/admin/aggregates.html#tenant-isolation-with-placement does
17:21:48 sean-k-mooney but based on domains not project ids
17:21:59 legochen thanks, … keystone brings up the domain feature, but, only for authentication stuff, not actually use it for management services. seems not that logical :(
17:22:01 sean-k-mooney im prettysure that is what we said to do at the last ptg
17:22:50 sean-k-mooney legochen: domains are really a way of providing limit admin to people so they can manage flavor/quotas within that domain
17:24:23 sean-k-mooney legochen: if you were to do it the way im proposing you would basicaly copy paste https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/scheduler/request_filter.py#L91-L132
17:24:35 sean-k-mooney and replace the project id with the domain
17:25:14 sean-k-mooney well really the TENANT_METADATA_KEY with a DOMAIN_METADATA_KEY
17:26:15 openstackgerrit Ghanshyam Mann proposed openstack/nova master: Modify glance's copy_image permission for nova-ceph-multistore https://review.opendev.org/760422
17:26:48 sean-k-mooney so in https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/scheduler/request_filter.py#L107-L114 just swap project_id for the domain and TENANT_METADATA_KEY for DOMAIN_METADATA_KEY and the rest is more or less the same
17:27:04 sean-k-mooney legochen: its less then 100 lines fo code + tests and docs

Earlier   Later