I think there is one packaged in sdesbure/identity_wrapper. I don't know if
the code can be shared.
https://hub.docker.com/r/sdesbure/identity_wrapper/tags/

It should not be so difficult for Dovetail to implement it if you need to
support v2 due to your backport rules.
https://github.com/openstack/keystone-specs/blob/master/attic/v3/identity-api-v3-v2-comparison.rst

Cédric

Le ven. 7 sept. 2018 à 11:27, Georg Kunz <[email protected]> a écrit :

> Hi Cedric,
>
>
>
> I am not aware of a Keystone v2/v3 proxy. Can you point me to some
> documentation?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Georg
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 6, 2018 7:11 PM
> *To:* Georg Kunz <[email protected]>; Yuyang (Gabriel) <
> [email protected]>; [email protected]; Limingjiang (Rex)
> <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* xudan (N) <[email protected]>; Raineri, Eddy <
> [email protected]>; Lincoln Lavoie <[email protected]>;
> Rautakumpu, Mika (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; SerenaFeng(zte) <[email protected]>;
> trevor.cooper <[email protected]>; Dimitrios Tsiolakis <
> [email protected]>; Katsaounis Molyvas Stamatios <
> [email protected]>; RICHOMME Morgan IMT/OLN <
> [email protected]>; [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] RE: Identity v2 in OVP 2018.08
>
>
>
> Georg,
>
>
>
> You could meet your backward compatibility requirements by adding a
> Keystone v2/v3 proxy.
>
> It will be the best (and not so difficult) approach if Dovetail selects
> Fraser containers.
>
>
>
> Or Dovetail may pick the right OPNFV releases according to SUT.
>
>
>
> Cédric
>
>
>
> On jeu., 2018-09-06 at 12:56 +0000, Georg Kunz wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Thank you all for your quick feedback. I have added the mailing list,
> which I forgot on my previous email.
>
>
>
> In the context of a compliance program, we need to strive for a good
> balance between
>
> i)                    keeping the bar up in terms of requirements on new
> features and
>
> ii)                   backwards compatibility to older versions of
> OpenStack which are typically part of commercial systems.
>
>
>
> In order to get some guidance in this regard, we can take a look at the
> OpenStack Powered programs for example. Every guideline (release spec) is
> supposed to be backwards compatible with 4 releases of OpenStack. So, the
> 2017.09 guideline [1], which matches Fraser, covers OpenStack releases back
> to Mitaka [2]. During Mikata, identity v2 was still a valid API choice, to
> my understanding.
>
>
>
> The exact number of backwards compatible releases in OVP is debatable, but
> I believe the need for backwards compatibility is apparent.
>
>
>
> As a consequence, this naturally imposes additional burden on the test
> projects – not even talking about CI resources (which is already now a
> *huge* problem for Dovetail) and gating against older releases. It is not
> my or Dovetail’s position to impose such requirements on test projects –
> which already lift the bulk load of work anyway. So, I wanted to come to a
> community agreement and – if needed – a TSC discussion and decision on this.
>
>
>
> Further feedback and input is welcome.
>
>
>
> [1] https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/interop/tree/2017.09.json
>
> [2] https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/interop/tree/2017.09.json#n10
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Georg
>
>
>
> *From:* Yuyang (Gabriel) <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 6, 2018 2:25 PM
> *To:* [email protected]; Limingjiang (Rex) <
> [email protected]>; Georg Kunz <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* xudan (N) <[email protected]>; Raineri, Eddy <
> [email protected]>; Lincoln Lavoie <[email protected]>;
> Rautakumpu, Mika (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; SerenaFeng(zte) <[email protected]>;
> trevor.cooper <[email protected]>; Dimitrios Tsiolakis <
> [email protected]>; Katsaounis Molyvas Stamatios <
> [email protected]>; RICHOMME Morgan IMT/OLN <
> [email protected]>
> *Subject:* RE: Identity v2 in OVP 2018.08
>
>
>
> Hi Georg,
>
>
>
> The stress_ping test in Bottlenecks call yardstick to executing tests. For
> the Bottlenecks part, both v2 and v3 are supported.
>
> I am not sure about Yardstick. The stress-ping test has been run on any v2
> openstack quite a while.
>
> I will try to find a v2 openstack and do some test to find out.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Gabriel
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
> <[email protected]>]
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 06, 2018 7:42 PM
> *To:* Limingjiang (Rex) <[email protected]>; Georg Kunz <
> [email protected]>
> *Cc:* xudan (N) <[email protected]>; Raineri, Eddy <
> [email protected]>; Lincoln Lavoie <[email protected]>;
> Rautakumpu, Mika (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; SerenaFeng(zte) <[email protected]>;
> trevor.cooper <[email protected]>; Dimitrios Tsiolakis <
> [email protected]>; Katsaounis Molyvas Stamatios <
> [email protected]>; Yuyang (Gabriel) <[email protected]>;
> RICHOMME Morgan IMT/OLN <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* RE: Identity v2 in OVP 2018.08
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> The support has been fully removed in Queens (Gambia) and was highly
> deprecated in Pike (since many releases).
>
>
>
> A compliance program should be also conformed with OpenStack.
>
> But it’s true that there is already a strong exception in Dovetail refuted
> by OpenStack from a while about nova micro-api versions.
>
>
>
> I’m afraid that you may select opnfv/functest:danube in case of Keystone
> v2.
>
>
>
> Cédric
>
>
>
> *De :* Limingjiang (Rex) [mailto:[email protected]
> <[email protected]>]
> *Envoyé :* jeudi 6 septembre 2018 13:19
> *À :* Georg Kunz
> *Cc :* xudan (N); Raineri, Eddy; Lincoln Lavoie; Rautakumpu, Mika (Nokia
> - FI/Espoo); [email protected]; SerenaFeng(zte); trevor.cooper;
> Dimitrios Tsiolakis; Katsaounis Molyvas Stamatios; OLLIVIER Cédric IMT/OLN;
> Yuyang (Gabriel)
> *Objet :* RE: Identity v2 in OVP 2018.08
>
>
>
> Hi Georg,
>
>
>
> I think it works for Openstack Pike. But I suppose it will be deprecated
> anyway in the later release of Openstack. [1]
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://docs.openstack.org/releasenotes/keystone/pike.html#deprecation-notes
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rex Lee
>
>
>
>
> +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
> [image: cid:[email protected]]
>
> + *Mingjiang Li (Rex)* Mobile: +86 13761275017
>
> + Shanghai Institute, Huawei
>
> + No. 2222, Xinjinqiao Road, Pudong, Shanghai, 201206, P.R.China
>
>
> +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
>
> *From:* Georg Kunz [mailto:[email protected]
> <[email protected]>]
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 06, 2018 5:00 PM
> *To:* xudan (N) <[email protected]>; Raineri, Eddy <
> [email protected]>; Lincoln Lavoie <[email protected]>;
> Rautakumpu, Mika (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; SerenaFeng(zte) <[email protected]>;
> trevor.cooper <[email protected]>; Dimitrios Tsiolakis <
> [email protected]>; Katsaounis Molyvas Stamatios <
> [email protected]>; [email protected]; Yuyang
> (Gabriel) <[email protected]>; Limingjiang (Rex) <
> [email protected]>
> *Subject:* Identity v2 in OVP 2018.08
>
>
>
> Hi Dovetailers,
>
>
>
> I’d like to come back with a question to the team. We decided some time
> ago to remove the identity v2 test cases because Functest currently does
> not support v2. However, I am not feeling very good about this anymore.
> From a compliance program perspective, there might be the requirement to
> still support v2, which is deprecated but still a valid API on older
> versions of OpenStack. Moreover, as this was part of OVP 2018.01, we
> probably need a deprecation phase in OVP as well. Finally, I suspect we
> should get back to the TSC in order to get approval for this – the original
> TSC approval still included v2.
>
>
>
> @Rex: Does Yardstick support identity v2? I was able to run an HA test on
> Apex with v2.
>
>
>
> @Gabriel: I believe Bottlenecks support v2. Is that true? I cannot test
> Bottlenecks on my virtual deployment because Bottlenecks tends to kill it.
> 😉
>
>
>
> So, I’d like to get your opinion and input on this.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Georg
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu 
> ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
> falsifie. Merci.
>
>
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
> information that may be protected by law;
>
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
> this message and its attachments.
>
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
> modified, changed or falsified.
>
> Thank you.
>
> 
>
>

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#21999): 
https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/21999
Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/25237240/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/unsub  
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to