On 11 June 2014 08:38, Dmitriy Shulyak wrote:
> Yes, in my opinion salt can completely replace astute/mcollective/rabbitmq.
> Listen and respond to the events generated by nailgun, or any other plugin
> - not a problem.
> There is already some kind of plugin for salt that adds ability to execute
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 05:24:36PM +, Vijendar Komalla wrote:
> Hi Devs/All,
> Does any one have comments/objections for following interim solution?
> 1. Add a config option to enable/disable parameter encryption and set
> default value to disable
> 2. Encrypt parameters that were marked as hid
Hi,
I am using the below cmd to boot cirros-0.3.2-x86_64-uec image thats
present in devstack
by default...
nova boot --flavor m1.nano --image cirros-0.3.2-x86_64-uec --key_name
mykey --security_group default myvm_nano
nova list -> shows the instance as ACTIVE/Running
Taking the VNC console, I
No one that is using PyCharm/Eclipse and able to debug the code? :(
- Original Message -
From: "Gal Sagie"
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, June 9, 2014 1:59:05 PM
Subject: [openstack-dev][Neutron] Debugging Devstack Neutron with Pycharm
Hello all,
I am trying
Good day, Stackers, Trove community.
I'd like to start thread related to orchestration based resource
management. At current state Heat support in Trove is nothing else than
experimental. Trove should be able to fully support Trove as resource
management driver.
Why is it so important?
Because
Hi Dmitry,
I wanted to confirm that the image is getting uploaded fine. Only horizon
is showing the "504 Gateway Timeout" error after the upload is complete.
Thanks,
Tizy
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Tizy Ninan wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> Sorry for the late reply. I will try this version o
I've added examples in data plane, control plane and signal processing that
relate to ETSI use case #5 (IMS).
Martin
-Original Message-
From: Steve Gordon [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 10 June 2014 20:06
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Cc: Chris Wrig
Anita, I put the meeting on my schedule.
Jay, can you be a back-up person?
Thanks,
Ilya
2014-06-10 22:18 GMT+04:00 Anita Kuno :
> On 06/10/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> > Stackers,
> >
> > OK, we are fully aware that there are problems with the early DriverLog
> > data that is shown in the
On 06/10/2014 09:59 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Now why is there a desire to implement these requirements using
traditional message brokers?
I would speculate that any desire to utilise a message broker as opposed
to a database would be to achieve different performance characteristics
for the
Hi,
As far as I remember we wanted to replace Astute with Mistral [1], do we
really want to have some intermediate steps (I mean salt) to do it?
[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Mistral
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Dmitriy Shulyak
wrote:
> Yes, in my opinion salt can completely replac
On 06/10/2014 09:57 PM, Janczuk, Tomasz wrote:
> Using processes to isolate tenants is certainly possible. There is a range
> of isolation mechanisms that can be used, from VM level isolation
> (basically a separate deployment of the broker per-tenant), to process
> level isolation, to sub-process
Actually i am proposing salt as alternative, the main reason - salt is
mature, feature full orchestration solution, that is well adopted even by
our internal teams
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Evgeniy L wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As far as I remember we wanted to replace Astute with Mistral [1], do
Hi,
There are many mature orchestration applications (Salt, Ansible, Cloudify,
Mistral). Is there any comparison chart? That would be nice to compare them
to understand the maturity level. Thanks
~Sergii
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Dmitriy Shulyak
wrote:
> Actually i am proposing salt a
well, i dont have any comparison chart, i can work on one based on
requirements i've provided in initial letter, but:
i like ansible, but it is agentless, and it wont fit well in our current
model of communication between nailgun and orchestrator
cloudify - java based application, even if it is plu
Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 16:09 +0100, Duncan Thomas wrote:
>> On 10 June 2014 15:07, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>>
>>> Exposing which configurations are actively "tested" is a perfectly sane
>>> thing to do. I don't see why you think calling this "certification" is
>>> necessary
On 06/10/2014 02:55 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
>
>
>> Over the last 7 days ceilometer unit test jobs have a 18% failure rate in the
>> gate queue [0], while we see expect to see some failures in integration
>> testing, unit tests should not be failing in the gate with such a high
>> frequency (and f
- Original Message -
> From: "Alan Kavanagh"
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> , "Steve
>
> Hi Adrian et.al
>
> Adrian thanks for taking a stab at this, I think the use case list is a
> little long but good to put on the map. One item I would point o
More than happy to help out, I think we are on a good path by focusing on the
current BP's we have. I will not make it to IRC meeting today, but will comment
afterwords.
I think Adrian also pointed out one other point just to put on the table so we
set the tone and scope accordingly, that is som
Hm, strange.
I have contributed in Icehouse but didn't get the e-mail fro voting. I
wanted to vote from the link which you provided but it didn't work for
me - "you already voted from given key".
Can anybody help?
Thanks
-- Jarda
On 2014/10/06 21:18, Radomir Dopieralski wrote:
Hello everyo
Hi,
ceilometer-agent-central element was added recently into overcloud
image. To be able scale out overcloud control nodes, we need HA for this
central agent. Currently central agent can not scale out (until [1] is
done). For now, the simplest way is add the central agent to Pacemaker,
which i
On 11/06/14 10:19 +0100, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 06/10/2014 09:59 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Now why is there a desire to implement these requirements using
traditional message brokers?
I would speculate that any desire to utilise a message broker as
opposed to a database would be to achieve dif
Hi
I'm looking at how to make cinder LVM on tripleo make use of a disk
other than the OS disk. There are lots of good reasons for this, but
they can be summarised as 'a guest running dd should not bring down
your entire cloud'.
My problem is that tripleo doesn't seem to have any concept of
hardwa
Gal Sagie wrote:
> I am trying to debug devstack Neutron with Pycharm, i have found here
> (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronDevelopment#How_to_debug_Neutron_.28and_other_OpenStack_projects_probably_.29)
>
> That i need to change the neutron server code to
> this=>*eventlet.monkey_patch()* To
On 06/11/2014 01:16 PM, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Try voting from outside of the VPN. The anonymous votes are one per IP
address.
> Hm, strange.
>
> I have contributed in Icehouse but didn't get the e-mail fro voting. I
> wanted to vote from the link which you provided but it didn't work for
> me -
On 06/11/2014 12:31 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 06/10/2014 09:59 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Now why is there a desire to implement these requirements using
traditional message brokers?
[...]
There are 2 main reasons that I don't believe are strong enough to
change the way Marconi works right
On 10 June 2014 18:18, Irena Berezovsky wrote:
> Hi Luke,
>
> Very impressive solution!
>
Thanks for the kind words!
>
>
> I do not think there is a problem to keep agent out of the tree in a short
> term, but would highly recommend to put it upstream in a longer term.
>
> You will benefit fro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
Le 2014-06-11 06:04, Lu, Lianhao a écrit :
When we're debugging a ceilometer bug #1320420, we find that for the
oslo messaging
notification listener, if we have multiple endpoints registered through
oslo.messaging.get_notification_listener()
On 10/06/14 18:12 +, Janczuk, Tomasz wrote:
I the last few days I attempted to implement a RabbitMQ (AMQP 0.9) storage
driver for Marconi. These are the take-aways from this experiment. High level,
it showed that current Marconi APIs *cannot* be mapped onto the AMQP 0.9
abstractions. In fa
Thanks Martin
Perhaps I am missing this a little bit, but in relation to the control plane
and signal processing, how do you see that fitting into requirements we would
need in Openstack? If I may jump a little bit here, the only one I can see is
making sure the app is installed on a given PCI
Hi Yunhong,
Thanks for the prompt response. For the second one, are you working on the
existing bug, or a new one? If it’s a new bug, please let me know the bug
number.
—Robert
On 6/10/14, 5:09 PM, "Jiang, Yunhong"
mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi, Robert
For your first qu
On 11/06/14 13:01 +0100, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 06/11/2014 12:31 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 06/10/2014 09:59 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Now why is there a desire to implement these requirements using
traditional message brokers?
[...]
There are 2 main reasons that I don't believe are strong
Hello folks,
I am happy to announce, that based on previous etherpad gathering, mails
and discussions, on the weekly meeting we confirmed final dates for
TripleO mid-cycle meetup:
July 21-25 (Monday-Friday)
Red Hat office, Raleigh, North Carolina
I will be working on another arrangem
Thanks a lot, this works, i will update the wiki.
Gal.
- Original Message -
From: "Henry Gessau"
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 2:41:47 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Debugging Devstack Neutron with Pycharm
Gal Sagie wrote:
I am
On 06/11/2014 01:28 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
There are three things that I consider really valuable:
1. Sharding support: It allows admins to have separate clusters/nodes
of stores and configure marconi to use them all based on
pre-configured rules. It's similar to what qpid-dispatch does but t
On 06/10/2014 12:01 PM, Maxime Vidori wrote:
+1 for the use of mock.
Is mox3 really needed? Or can we move our tests for python3 to mock, and use
this library for every tests for python3?
- Original Message -
From: "David Lyle"
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage qu
On 2014-06-11 04:15:05 + (+), Lu, Lianhao wrote:
[...]
> I saw a patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97893/ to revert
> the check but that patch seems not get populated to the test farm.
That change modifies a script which gets preinstalled on all job
worker images (the snapshots from w
On 2014-06-11 14:32:05 +0200 (+0200), Jaromir Coufal wrote:
> I am happy to announce, that based on previous etherpad gathering, mails and
> discussions, on the weekly meeting we confirmed final dates for TripleO
> mid-cycle meetup:
>
> July 21-25 (Monday-Friday)
> Red Hat office, Raleigh,
Hi Horizoners,
A lot of other projects have already adopted and started using a specs
repo. Do we want to have one for Horizon?
--
Regards,
Ana Krivokapic
Software Engineer
OpenStack team
Red Hat Inc.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lis
On 11/06/14 13:42 +0100, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 06/11/2014 01:28 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
There are three things that I consider really valuable:
1. Sharding support: It allows admins to have separate clusters/nodes
of stores and configure marconi to use them all based on
pre-configured rules. I
Hi,
I was mistakenly reusing the Blueprint
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/neutron-ipv6-radvd-ra to draft
up the ipv6 RA support in neutron. I apologize for any confusion that this may
have caused. To correct it, I created a new blueprint
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron
Good day, Stackers, Trove community.
I’d like to start thread related to Datastore testing infrastructure.
Why does we need it?
At this time Trove has integrated more than databases. To be precise:
-
MySQL
-
mysql-server
-
percona
-
Cassandra
-
Mo
Hi everyone,
Just a quick reminder that the weekly OpenStack QA team IRC meeting will be
tomorrow Thursday, June 12th at 22:00 UTC in the #openstack-meeting channel.
The agenda for tomorrow's meeting can be found here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting
Anyone is welcome to ad
Hi,
I added ipv6 support in devstack https://review.openstack.org/#/c/87987/. This
is a WIP patch given that neutron ipv6 is not fully implemented yet. With this
script, dual stack data network can be created with neutron as well. The only
thing that needs to be done manually is starting the RA
>>>the backend it what's responsible for handling it from that point
Right! For ex. NetScaler handles cert sync across HA nodes via its proprietary
mechanisms.
Since shadow copying is not required for every driver, the functionality can be
implemented by the driver that needs it.
Thanks,
Vija
On 10/06/14 17:15 +1200, Robert Collins wrote:
That seems pretty solid reasoning; +1 from me no July 21-25th; I know
not everyone can attend - but with the size of the team every
situation will have some folk that can't play.
What do we need to do to lock this in to RedHat's venue schedule?
-Ro
On Jun 11, 2014, at 8:00 AM, Radomir Dopieralski wrote:
> On 06/11/2014 01:16 PM, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
>
> Try voting from outside of the VPN. The anonymous votes are one per IP
> address.
>
>> Hm, strange.
>>
>> I have contributed in Icehouse but didn't get the e-mail fro voting. I
>> wante
On 10 June 2014 09:23, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> On 09/06/14 19:31 +, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
>> Against:
>>
>> • Makes it hard for users to create applications that work across
>> multiple
>>clouds, since critical functionality may or may not be available in a
>> given
>>deployment. (co
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 12:24 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> As part of the push to release code from the oslo incubator in
>> stand-alone libraries, we have had several different discussions about
>> versioning and release schedules. This is
tl;dr: some pervasive changes were made to nova to enable polling in
ceilometer which broke some things and in my opinion shouldn't have been
merged as a bug fix but rather should have been a blueprint.
===
The detailed version:
I opened bug 1328694 [1] yesterday and found that came back to s
On 06/10/2014 10:35 AM, Steve Gordon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just a reminder that the next meeting of the NFV sub-team is scheduled for
> Wednesday June 11 @ 1400 UTC in #openstack-meeting-alt.
>
> Agenda:
>
> * Review actions from last week
> * russellb: NFV topic on ML
> * russellb: #openst
Thanks for bringing this to the list Matt, comments inline ...
> tl;dr: some pervasive changes were made to nova to enable polling in
> ceilometer which broke some things and in my opinion shouldn't have been
> merged as a bug fix but rather should have been a blueprint.
>
> ===
>
> The detail
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:07:59AM EDT, Robert Li (baoli) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was mistakenly reusing the Blueprint
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/neutron-ipv6-radvd-ra to draft
> up the ipv6 RA support in neutron. I apologize for any confusion that this
> may have caused. To co
Hi Deepak,
This mailing list is for development discussions only. Please use the general
or operators
mailing list
(http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators) to
ask questions about running OpenStack.
Best Regards,
Solly Ross
- Original Message -
> From: "
+1 for mock (>> mox).
Joris
-Original Message-
From: Jiri Tomasek [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 14:43
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] mocking policy
On 06/10/2014 12:01 PM, Maxime Vidori wrote:
> +1 for the use o
On Wed 11 Jun 2014 06:54:53 AM MDT, Ana Krivokapic wrote:
> Hi Horizoners,
>
> A lot of other projects have already adopted and started using a specs
> repo. Do we want to have one for Horizon?
>
I'm still not quite clear how this works, but I'm open to it if it
makes things a little nicer.
--
J
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:58:14AM EDT, Robert Li (baoli) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With the right version of
> dnsmasq (I’m using 2.68) in use, it will be successfully launched and
> handing out both ipv6 and ipv4 addresses. An example of dnsmasq
> instance is shown as below:
We should consider bumping t
Jaromir Coufal wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> I am happy to announce, that based on previous etherpad gathering, mails
> and discussions, on the weekly meeting we confirmed final dates for
> TripleO mid-cycle meetup:
>
> July 21-25 (Monday-Friday)
> Red Hat office, Raleigh, North Carolina
Ple
I plan to move the primary content from Meetings/NFV to Team/NFV and
keep Meetings/NFV as just meeting info (and a note to update Team/NFV
with any real content). This is just a heads up, please holler if you
see an issue with this.
thanks,
-chris
___
Do we know who has an opinion? If so maybe we can reach out to them
directly and ask them to comment.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Brandon Logan
wrote:
> Well we got a few opinions, but not enough understanding of the two
> options to make an informed decision. It was requested that the co
I spoke to Mark McClain about this yesterday, I'll see if I can get
him to join the LBaaS team meeting tomorrow so between he and I we can
close on this with the LBaaS team.
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Susanne Balle wrote:
> Do we know who has an opinion? If so maybe we can reach out to the
Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote:
> Our follow-up session was very productive. The goal of this session
> was to define and document a clear scope for each project [5]. This is
> the main document in regards to the goals set by TC in response to
> Murano incubation request. We identified a clear scope for e
Hi,
It's looking like bash8 isn't great. It's too much python-centric. At
least that's the view of multiple Debian Developers (not really mine, I
honestly don't care that much...).
Could we think about a better name?
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Original Message
Subject: Bu
Hi
Are there any tests available for ipv6 in Tempest. Also whats the road map for
addition of these tests.
Ajay
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>> On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 16:09 +0100, Duncan Thomas wrote:
>>> On 10 June 2014 15:07, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>>>
Exposing which configurations are actively "tested" is a perfectly sane
thing to do. I don't s
Hi,
I think the previous solution is easier for a user to understand. The
referenced container got tampered/deleted we throw an error - but keep existing
load balancers intact.
With the shadow container we get additional complexity and the user might be
confused where the values are coming fro
Sorry, I am late to the party. Holding the shadow copy in the backend is a fine
solution.
Also, if containers are immutable can they be deleted at all? Can we make a
requirement that a user can't delete a container in Barbican?
German
-Original Message-
From: Eichberger, German
Sent:
On 6/11/14, 2:43 AM, "Gordon Sim" wrote:
>On 06/10/2014 09:57 PM, Janczuk, Tomasz wrote:
>> Using processes to isolate tenants is certainly possible. There is a
>>range
>> of isolation mechanisms that can be used, from VM level isolation
>> (basically a separate deployment of the broker per-tenan
Hi,
That would be nice to compare Ansible and Salt. They are both Python based.
Also, Ansible has pull model also. Personally, I am big fan of Ansible
because of its simplicity and speed of playbook development.
~Sergii
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Dmitriy Shulyak
wrote:
> well, i dont ha
tl;dr: The specs repository has been great to work with. As a
reviewer, it makes reviews easier. As PTL, it makes tracking easier as
well.
Since Juno-1 is about to close, I wanted to give everyone an update on
Neutron's usage of the specs repository. These are observations from
using this since a
sorry, please ignore
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Stephen Wong wrote:
> Hey,
>
> What Dan has been waiting for, Geneve support in OVS!!!
>
> - Stephen
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Jesse Gross
> Date: Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:47 PM
> Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH 0/7
Hey,
What Dan has been waiting for, Geneve support in OVS!!!
- Stephen
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jesse Gross
Date: Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:47 PM
Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH 0/7] Basic Geneve Support
To: [email protected]
This series implements support for Geneve
(http:
Hello guys,
I was taking a look at the proposed alarm-page designs [1] for the bp:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/ceilometer-alarm-management-page
and I saw that the alarms table has a column named "Resource Name". The
intention of that column is to show the resources associated
Hi all,
I'm back and mellow after my week at the beach. Here's what's going on in
the world of docs.
We had our doc team meeting this morning. The 2nd and 4th Wed. are Europe
and North America times, the 1st and 3rd Wed. are for Australia and Pacific
area time zones. Find the meeting logs here:
ht
Users have to be able to delete their secrets from Barbican, it's a
fundamental key-management requirement.
> -Original Message-
> From: Eichberger, German
> Sent: 11 June 2014 17:43
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron]
Nova is having a related issue, where we are hitting issues in our unit
tests.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1328997
Stderr: 'ERROR: database "openstack_citest" is being accessed by other
users\\nDETAIL: There are 1 other session(s) using the database.\\n\''
http://logs.openstack.org/76/9
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
The previous revision of this OSSN specified an incorrect workaround.
This new revision should supersede the old revision.
Thanks,
- -NGK
- --
Some versions of Glance do not a
Anne,
The VPN section looks completed but we are introducing new changes on the
services area.
I have been using Neutron team to include DocImpact on their commit messages to
keep track of news changes for the Docs. On the last Neutron IRC meeting we
have agreed that all commits missing DocImpa
I do agree, bumping the dnsmasq version should not be a big deal and it
seems Aaron is already working on that.
Edgar
On 6/11/14, 8:24 AM, "Collins, Sean"
wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:58:14AM EDT, Robert Li (baoli) wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> With the right version of
>> dnsmasq (I¹m using 2.68)
Thanks Flavio, some comments inline below.
On 6/11/14, 5:15 AM, "Flavio Percoco" wrote:
>>
>> 1. Marconi exposes HTTP APIs that allow messages to be listed without
>>consuming them. This API cannot be implemented on top of AMQP 0.9 which
>>implements a strict queueing semantics.
>
>I believe t
There are other fundamental things about secrets, like relying on their
presence, and not encouraging a proliferation of a dozen
mini-secret-stores everywhere to get around that fact, which makes it less
secret. Have you considered a ³force² delete flag, required if some
service is using the secre
Honestly, I kind of don't care. :)
It's more meaningful than most of what's on pypi for naming.
I'd hate to think what these guys think of firefox, grub, thunderbird,
pidgin, zope, git, mercurial, etc, etc.
-Sean
On 06/11/2014 12:09 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> It's looking l
A few months back several of us were consistently hitting file system
resize issues. After making a slight change to diskimage-builder to fix
[1] things seem to have gotten better... but I still hear people
occasionally mentioning issues.
On the ext4 mailing list it appears there are still some on
On 06/11/2014 02:01 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> Honestly, I kind of don't care. :)
+1 :-)
--
Russell Bryant
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Fuelers,
You can now use the Fuel Review Dashboard based on gerrit-dash-creator
by Sean Dague to prioritize your Gerrit reviews inbox:
https://github.com/sdague/gerrit-dash-creator/pull/6
The dashboard has following sections:
1) My Patches Requiring Attention -- your patches with a -1 from review
On 06/11/2014 02:01 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> Honestly, I kind of don't care. :)
+1 :-)
+1 yep. that about covers it.___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>From an LBaaS view we have two use cases we access the certs:
1) When a new LB is build, an LB is changed, etc. -- we throw an error if the
certificate is missing, broken, etc,
2) When we want to failover -- we use the last good certificate from a safe
place (aka local copy, barbican copy, etc
On 6/11/2014 10:01 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
Thanks for bringing this to the list Matt, comments inline ...
tl;dr: some pervasive changes were made to nova to enable polling in
ceilometer which broke some things and in my opinion shouldn't have been
merged as a bug fix but rather should have
A better download link that remains valid through updates:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/angdraug/gerrit-dash-creator/fuel-dashboard/dashboards/fuel.dash
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Dmitry Borodaenko
wrote:
> Fuelers,
>
> You can now use the Fuel Review Dashboard based on gerrit-dash-cr
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Morgan Fainberg
wrote:
>
>
> On 06/11/2014 02:01 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> Honestly, I kind of don't care. :)
>
> +1 :-)
>
> +1 yep. that about covers it.
Ordinarily I'd agree that naming is a bike shed argument, but
strongly suggests that the package contains
th
We've had a few reviews recently going around to mask out X-Auth-Token
from the python clients in the debug output. Currently there are a mix
of ways this is done.
In glanceclient (straight stricken)
X-Auth-Token: ***
The neutronclient proposal -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/93866/9/neutronc
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
>
>
> On 6/11/2014 10:01 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for bringing this to the list Matt, comments inline ...
>>
>> tl;dr: some pervasive changes were made to nova to enable polling in
>>> ceilometer which broke some things and
Excerpts from Adam Harwell's message of 2014-06-10 12:04:41 -0700:
> So, it looks like any sort of validation on Deletes in Barbican is going
> to be a no-go. I'd like to propose a third option, which might be the
> safest route to take for LBaaS while still providing some of the
> convenience of u
While reviewing some specs I noticed that I had put myself down for more
Juno-2 work than is likely to be completed. I suspect this will happen
routinely with many folks. Also, assignees may change. This information
is not really part of the spec at all. Since we are still using
blueprints to a
Hi Doug,
Barbican does guarantee the integrity and availability of the secret,
unless the owner of the secret deletes it from Barbican. We’re not
encouraging that you store a shadow-copy of the secret either. This was
proposed by the LBaaS team as a possible workaround for your use case.
Our re
> > Thanks for bringing this to the list Matt, comments inline ...
> >
> >> tl;dr: some pervasive changes were made to nova to enable polling in
> >> ceilometer which broke some things and in my opinion shouldn't have been
> >> merged as a bug fix but rather should have been a blueprint.
> >>
> >>
There has been a lot of interest in holding a Heat meetup during the
Juno cycle. We have the opportunity to piggy-back on the TripleO meetup
- and I expect at least some Heat developers to attend that - but we
also know that some key people from both Heat and TripleO will be unable
to attend (T
This stems a bit further than just reduction in noise in the logs. Think of
this from a case of security (with centralized logging or lower privileged
users able to read log files). If we aren’t putting passwords into these log
files, we shouldn’t be putting tokens in. The major functional diffe
+1, I would remove them as well, assignee and milestone probably do not need
to go through review, it something we can agree upon at QA meetings.
andrea
-Original Message-Cl@ud3D3bu$$y
From: David Kranz [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 11 June 2014 20:18
To: OpenStack Development Mailing
For both the security and the log line length, Swift is by default just
displaying the first 16 bytes of the token.
--John
On Jun 11, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Morgan Fainberg wrote:
> This stems a bit further than just reduction in noise in the logs. Think of
> this from a case of security (with
On 06/11/2014 06:05 PM, Janczuk, Tomasz wrote:
Process level isolation is more costly than sub-process level isolation
primarily due to larger memory consumption. For example, CGI has worse
cost characteristics than FastCGI when scaled out. But the example closer
to Marconi¹s use case is database
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
