| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2022-07-26 | |||
| 17:34:35 | dansmith | bauzas: not always local :) | |
| 17:34:45 | sean-k-mooney | its about encypting non cinder sotrage | |
| 17:35:05 | melwitt | swap isn't included so "non-volume data disks" doesn't even work :P | |
| 17:35:11 | sean-k-mooney | although personally i woudl have perfered if it also work for bfv | |
| 17:35:26 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: very true | |
| 17:35:49 | dansmith | melwitt: but swap isn't encrypted right? that's why I put "data" in there :) | |
| 17:36:14 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: what would the flavor extra specs be for that | |
| 17:36:27 | melwitt | ephemeral_and_root_disk_encryption 😂 | |
| 17:36:37 | dansmith | nvdd_encryption=FML | |
| 17:36:40 | melwitt | dansmith: oh, I see. yeah swap is not encrypted | |
| 17:36:50 | melwitt | I didn't get the "data" emphasis | |
| 17:36:53 | sean-k-mooney | honestly i prefer that name to what we have | |
| 17:37:35 | sean-k-mooney | too bad we cant just call it nova_disk_encryption | |
| 17:37:43 | sean-k-mooney | i.e. encyuption for stuff nova owns | |
| 17:38:22 | dansmith | non-volume is the key I think, but it's not very nice to say/write | |
| 17:38:48 | sean-k-mooney | ya | |
| 17:39:03 | sean-k-mooney | flavor_disk_encryption? | |
| 17:39:07 | sean-k-mooney | but no | |
| 17:39:10 | sean-k-mooney | that break for bfv | |
| 17:39:24 | sean-k-mooney | well sort of | |
| 17:39:41 | melwitt | and swap | |
| 17:39:51 | dansmith | the argument here is about the naming of the extra spec? | |
| 17:39:53 | sean-k-mooney | ya swap i would honestly just add | |
| 17:39:59 | dansmith | I mean to be honest, this feels like a *massive* waste of time | |
| 17:40:04 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: yes extra spec and image property | |
| 17:40:23 | dansmith | how about nova_disk_encryption <- excludes cinder, and if you're worried about swap, then add swap to it and move on | |
| 17:40:39 | sean-k-mooney | i would be happy with ^ | |
| 17:41:05 | bauzas | wfm | |
| 17:41:06 | sean-k-mooney | i just was not sure if we are ment to use the project name in things like this | |
| 17:41:28 | bauzas | let's just write a very good config option doc | |
| 17:41:46 | dansmith | nova_ on this case makes it clear we're talking about the things nova owns | |
| 17:41:52 | sean-k-mooney | sure and by config option doc you mean flavor validator doc | |
| 17:41:52 | dansmith | compute_ would work too I guess, but I think it's less clear | |
| 17:42:28 | sean-k-mooney | ack ya nova_ i liek more but i would be happy with compute_ | |
| 17:42:40 | sean-k-mooney | so either i think are ok | |
| 17:42:53 | dansmith | nova_ and promise to never ever discuss this again? :) | |
| 17:43:16 | bauzas | or say it 5 times in front of a mirror ? | |
| 17:43:24 | sean-k-mooney | :) | |
| 17:43:38 | sean-k-mooney | melwitt: are you ok with that? | |
| 17:45:06 | melwitt | I guess. I'm focused on making sure everyone's happy with the name. I checked https://docs.openstack.org/glance/latest/admin/useful-image-properties.html and don't find any other project names there so that feels a bit weird, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ | |
| 17:45:45 | bauzas | virt_disk_encryption ? | |
| 17:45:57 | dansmith | intrinsic_disk_encryption, managed_disk_encryption | |
| 17:46:00 | bauzas | damn, I stepped into the ... | |
| 17:46:15 | dansmith | virt_ is not specific enough I think, because cinder disks aren't real disks | |
| 17:46:30 | dansmith | non_volume_disk_encryption.. uglier, but no project name and more accurate | |
| 17:46:42 | dansmith | OR | |
| 17:46:52 | bauzas | oh, I was poorly refering to the fact we defer the disk creation to the underlying virt driver | |
| 17:46:55 | dansmith | we explain that "ephemeral disks" are "everything but volume disks" and then we're back to the start! | |
| 17:47:08 | melwitt | 😂 ahhhhhh | |
| 17:47:29 | sean-k-mooney | ya i still fine ephmeral kind of insulting to refer to novas storage but thats just me | |
| 17:47:30 | bauzas | (18:57:19) bauzas: yeah, if we need to write some doc explaining "ephemeral" == "this new thing" this is bad | |
| 17:47:30 | bauzas | (18:56:47) bauzas: if we pick something else, this has to be better understandable about what it is | |
| 17:47:30 | bauzas | (18:57:39) bauzas: hence the challenge | |
| 17:48:19 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: you're fine or you "find" ? | |
| 17:48:35 | bauzas | cores, would appreciate a quick +2 on os-vif blocking https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/850998/2 | |
| 17:48:35 | sean-k-mooney | we have had customer go to great lents to do terible things because they found the term ephemeral unackceptable | |
| 17:48:44 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: i find | |
| 17:48:54 | bauzas | or because they considered hostnames be FQDNs ? | |
| 17:49:03 | bauzas | sorry, this was easy | |
| 17:49:11 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: we should not need that anymore | |
| 17:49:14 | dansmith | personally I think ephemeral is a pretty accurate name | |
| 17:49:17 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: its blocked in upperconstraits | |
| 17:49:28 | dansmith | if they're local disks on compute nodes, then ephemeral means "they could go away if a single computer dies" | |
| 17:49:43 | sean-k-mooney | yep and so could cinder volumes | |
| 17:49:48 | dansmith | and even when they're on ceph, they're treated not nearly as precious as data volumes | |
| 17:49:49 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: most of them dont provide ha | |
| 17:49:59 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: we're pulling u-c on all jobs ? | |
| 17:50:04 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: but the intent behind a volume is long-term storage generally | |
| 17:50:10 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: we shoudl be | |
| 17:50:12 | bauzas | I thought this was only on tox targets | |
| 17:50:19 | bauzas | and not tempest | |
| 17:50:21 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: it would be a bug if we were not | |
| 17:50:26 | melwitt | sean-k-mooney: what's the customer did something bad bc they didn't like the term? | |
| 17:50:50 | opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/nova master: hacking: force explicit import of python's mock https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/708768 | |
| 17:51:10 | sean-k-mooney | well i wont mention there name but they instead on doing pci passthough fo a raid controler intor ther vm because they did not accept novas ephmeral storage as accpetable | |
| 17:51:10 | bauzas | sean-k-mooney: I'll propose a new rev for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/838976, we'll see | |
| 17:52:23 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: but that's just because either they didn't read docs, understand, or our docs suck | |
| 17:53:08 | dansmith | and if they're making decisions based on their perception of one word without knowing what it means in context, then they probably have many other problems | |
| 17:53:22 | sean-k-mooney | dansmith: yes they messed up the server toplogy and didnt realise we did not supprot block deivce passethough other then via cinder | |
| 17:53:23 | dansmith | like thinking cinder volumes are actually burnt ashes of former disks | |
| 17:53:35 | dansmith | and nova computes explode to make new space clouds | |
| 17:55:09 | melwitt | lol @ burnt former disks | |
| 17:56:39 | sean-k-mooney | i think im to the point where i dont care anymore | |
| 17:57:59 | dansmith | well, jokes aside, I think we probably have to just pick something that won't be perfect and move on | |
| #openstack-nova - 2022-07-27 | |||
| 06:10:53 | opendevreview | melanie witt proposed openstack/nova master: imagebackend: Add support to libvirt_info for LUKS based encryption https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/826755 | |
| 06:49:43 | gibi | o/ | |
| 07:00:28 | opendevreview | Takashi Natsume proposed openstack/nova-specs master: Create specs directory for 2023.1 Antelope https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova-specs/+/851007 | |
| 07:25:58 | bauzas | \o | |
| 07:42:39 | gibi | bauzas: I left feedback in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/838976 | |
| 08:11:05 | bauzas | gibi: will look soon | |
| 09:02:12 | opendevreview | wangkuntian proposed openstack/nova master: Modify the url of openstack client commands. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851197 | |
| 09:39:52 | gibi | stephenfin, sean-k-mooney: we have valid py310 failures in the mock switch patch | |
| 09:41:12 | gibi | we can debate that py310 is non voting, so we can merge regardless but as the failure is valid we just pushing the problem to our future slef | |
| 09:41:15 | gibi | self | |
| 09:42:25 | kashyap | gibi: Morning, can you give this another go? - I've addressed your concerns: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/851034 | |
| 09:42:37 | gibi | sure | |
| 09:43:51 | gibi | done +2 | |
| 09:43:56 | gibi | thanks for the releasenotes | |
| 09:44:13 | kashyap | gibi: Thank you! Now to figure out the backports | |
| 09:44:41 | gibi | I expect it to be painless as you have a well contained change | |