Monday, 2015-04-27

*** bharath has quit IRC00:15
*** haigang has joined #openstack-lbaas00:56
*** haigang has quit IRC01:18
*** ctracey has quit IRC01:20
*** ctracey has joined #openstack-lbaas01:22
*** haigang has joined #openstack-lbaas01:38
*** haigang has quit IRC01:40
*** haigang has joined #openstack-lbaas01:41
*** haigang has quit IRC01:49
*** haigang has joined #openstack-lbaas01:53
*** BrianShang_ has joined #openstack-lbaas02:25
*** BrianShang has quit IRC02:28
*** haigang has quit IRC02:56
*** haigang has joined #openstack-lbaas02:57
*** woodster_ has joined #openstack-lbaas03:05
*** sbalukoff has quit IRC05:38
*** kiran-r has joined #openstack-lbaas06:03
*** haigang has quit IRC06:21
*** woodster_ has quit IRC06:40
*** Santosh_ has joined #openstack-lbaas06:51
Santosh_Hi All06:53
Santosh_There are couple admin test cases which are failing if there is validation in backend driver .
Santosh_Admin test cases with empty tenant id are passing with logging noop driver (as there is no validation) But these tests are faling with validation in backend driver(NetScaler) . Driver response is bad-request but it is propagated as "internal driver error " to plugin layer06:58
*** sbalukoff has joined #openstack-lbaas07:05
*** kobis has joined #openstack-lbaas07:06
*** BrianShang_ has quit IRC07:33
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas07:35
*** rm_work has quit IRC07:59
*** rm_work|away has joined #openstack-lbaas07:59
*** rm_work|away is now known as rm_work07:59
*** rm_work has joined #openstack-lbaas07:59
*** apuimedo_ has joined #openstack-lbaas08:05
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC08:13
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-lbaas08:17
*** apuimedo_ has quit IRC08:49
*** apuimedo_ has joined #openstack-lbaas08:58
*** apuimedo has quit IRC09:39
*** apuimedo has joined #openstack-lbaas09:44
*** apuimedo_ has quit IRC10:22
*** apuimedo_ has joined #openstack-lbaas10:23
*** john-davidge has joined #openstack-lbaas11:10
*** woodster_ has joined #openstack-lbaas12:01
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC12:06
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-lbaas12:06
*** jschwarz has joined #openstack-lbaas12:29
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC12:37
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-lbaas12:37
*** openstackgerrit has quit IRC13:21
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-lbaas13:22
*** mestery_ is now known as mestery13:32
*** apuimedo_ has quit IRC13:50
*** BrianShang has quit IRC14:10
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas14:12
*** BrianShang has quit IRC14:20
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas14:21
*** BrianShang has quit IRC14:26
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas14:32
*** BrianShang has quit IRC14:36
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas14:38
*** BrianShang has quit IRC14:42
*** TrevorV_ has joined #openstack-lbaas14:43
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas14:43
*** BrianShang has quit IRC14:47
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas15:07
*** BrianShang has quit IRC15:11
*** kbyrne has quit IRC15:12
*** kbyrne has joined #openstack-lbaas15:16
*** jorgem has joined #openstack-lbaas15:17
*** sbalukoff has quit IRC15:24
*** sballe has quit IRC15:28
openstackgerritTrevor Vardeman proposed stackforge/octavia: Amphora SSH Driver
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas15:31
TrevorVdougwig if I sent you gist of a sphinx error when building docs, do you think I could steal some of your time today to help me fix it? or is there a better source?15:51
*** BrianShang has quit IRC15:51
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas15:53
*** kobis has quit IRC15:55
*** mlavalle has joined #openstack-lbaas15:55
*** BrianShang has quit IRC15:56
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas15:57
*** jorgem1 has joined #openstack-lbaas15:59
*** jorgem1 has quit IRC16:00
*** BrianShang has quit IRC16:01
*** jorgem has quit IRC16:01
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas16:03
*** BrianShang has quit IRC16:08
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas16:10
*** BrianShang has quit IRC16:13
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas16:15
*** BrianShang has quit IRC16:19
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas16:21
*** amotoki_ has joined #openstack-lbaas16:21
*** amotoki has quit IRC16:21
*** amotoki_ is now known as amotoki16:21
*** madhu_ak has joined #openstack-lbaas16:24
*** mwang2 has quit IRC16:26
*** BrianShang has quit IRC16:33
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas16:35
*** BrianShang has quit IRC16:39
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas16:41
*** BrianShang has quit IRC16:49
*** TrevorV_ has quit IRC16:49
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas16:53
*** BrianShang has quit IRC16:56
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas16:58
dougwigTrevorV: i'm far from a sphinx master, but I'll look.  maybe pastebin it here?17:00
*** logan2 has quit IRC17:05
*** BrianShang has quit IRC17:05
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas17:07
*** BrianShang has quit IRC17:13
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas17:14
*** jorgem has joined #openstack-lbaas17:16
*** kiran-r has quit IRC17:19
*** BrianShang has quit IRC17:20
*** jorgem has quit IRC17:20
*** jschwarz has quit IRC17:21
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas17:21
*** barclaac has joined #openstack-lbaas17:22
barclaacGood morning folks!17:24
barclaacblogan: I saw you replies to a thread talking about needing Barbican for LBaaS. Here's the question: If I didn't need TLS support could I run LBaaS v2 without Barbican?17:24
rm_workbarclaac: yes, in theory, though I am not sure there is a simple way in code to "turn off TLS support" right now?17:25
rm_workThere might be, I am just not sure since I have been away for a while17:25
barclaacI'm working on an internal roadmap and I'm trying to figure out if I can do the LBaaS in isolation.17:26
rm_workyeah I would imagine it would be possible17:26
barclaacI guess I'll just have to get some of the folks on the team here to test it.17:26
johnsomI am pretty sure it requires some code enhancements to disable TLS17:27
rm_workjohnsom: well, theoretically, it should be possible to have TLS enabled for some backends and not for others? meaning it should be up to the backend plugin whether TLS is supported or not?17:29
rm_workand in that case, does the driver do any validation on the data before things go async?17:29
rm_workor could the user put in a "create LB" request including TLS, have it return a 200 or whatever, then have the driver throw the exception for "not implemented" on TLS afterwards, causing it to ERROR?17:30
johnsomRight, I'm pretty sure he is asking about the ref driver17:30
barclaaccorrect - ref driver only.17:30
rm_workhmm, ok -- did ptoohill's changes to the ref driver to support TLS make it in?17:30
rm_workI assume they did by now17:30
rm_workreally, I think the answer is to add the fields necessary to support the LocalCertStore option17:31
rm_workso we can have TLS without barbican actually be an option17:31
rm_workfor dev/test deployments17:32
ptoohillThe TLS stuff did make it in17:32
barclaacI think local cert store would work.17:32
ptoohillThats a big change to the data model and other parts17:32
rm_workbarclaac: right now the API does not take in raw cert/key data from the user17:32
rm_workbarclaac: so while the code for the local store "works", there's no way for Neutron to get anything from the user to store in it17:33
rm_workthe API *only* takes a "certificate_id" right now17:33
rm_workwhich... if the user actually had access to the local store in order to put a cert/key there, would work17:33
rm_workso it's possible to workaround it by putting the stuff there manually and passing in an ID that you set17:34
rm_workwhich may be good enough to get you started17:34
ptoohillBut, if they don't need TLS at all, couldnt they just update to 'use' the local manager and not have to worry about barbican?17:34
rm_workptoohill: true, but what happens when the user passes in TLS data?17:35
ptoohillIt only takes an id, so unless its an id it will fail validation17:35
rm_workdo we have it set up to validate that they don't populate TLS fields?17:35
rm_workhmm interesting17:35
ptoohilland if they do pass id's it would fail in the backend17:35
rm_workso I guess it's fine17:35
rm_workit's just... <_<17:36
rm_worknot sure the errors that come back will be helpful to the user17:36
rm_workbut it should be fine17:36
ptoohillI do take that back though, there no UUID validation because its actually a 256 char string :P17:36
rm_workbut i think it tries to validate the cert from the storage mechanism on the initial call?17:37
rm_workis that part sync?17:37
rm_workor async?17:37
ptoohillit validates up front17:37
ptoohillso it would fail early17:37
barclaacThat would work for me. I could easily release note that TLS cert IDs will be accepted but just plain won't work.17:37
rm_workbecause no ID that's passed in will be a valid cert_id, since the repository will be empty17:37
rm_workbarclaac: yeah that should be fine17:38
ptoohillthat would probably be the 'simplest' solution at this point if youre ok with it17:38
barclaacOK. I'll get ony of my folks to verify but this sounds very workable for me17:38
Santosh_Hi All [12:26] <Santosh_> There are couple admin test cases which are failing if there is validation in backend driver . [12:28] <Santosh_> Admin test cases with empty tenant id are passing with logging noop driver (as there is no validation) But these tests are faling with validation in backend driver(NetScaler) . Driver response is bad-request but it is propagated as "internal dr17:40
madhu_akSanthosh_ : I saw your patch, will add my comments on that. As a neutron admin, I am curious to know, can't he do anything he wants because he knows what to do and expect?17:44
madhu_akSantosh_ ^^17:45
*** amotoki has quit IRC17:47
*** bharath has joined #openstack-lbaas17:47
*** fnaval has joined #openstack-lbaas17:48
*** BrianShang has quit IRC17:48
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas17:50
*** barclaac|2 has joined #openstack-lbaas17:50
*** barclaac has quit IRC17:54
Santosh_Test case looks invalid to me (as it is expecting create to be successful with empty tenant id).17:54
Santosh_Even though above tests will pass with logging noop as there is no validation by driver17:55
Santosh_"expecting create to be successful with empty tenant-id " is not correct17:58
*** kiran-r has joined #openstack-lbaas18:04
john-davidgeblogan: ping18:06
*** sbalukoff has joined #openstack-lbaas18:08
openstackgerritMichael Johnson proposed stackforge/octavia: Implements Octavia Controller Worker
*** xgerman has joined #openstack-lbaas18:13
john-davidgeblogan: I have to drop, but if you see this please could you take another look at ? I think I've addressed your concern. Thanks18:16
openstackgerritmin wang proposed stackforge/octavia: Fix Octavia complexity issues
rm_workI think I don't hate @staticmethod as much as blogan does18:24
*** john-davidge has quit IRC18:24
xgermanI think nobody does :-)18:29
*** kiran-r has quit IRC18:29
openstackgerritAishwarya Thangappa proposed openstack/neutron-lbaas: Added admin/non_admin api tests
*** jorgem has joined #openstack-lbaas18:38
blogan@staticmethod should diaf18:44
bloganbut i can deal with it, but i don't think methods should be tagged as staticmethod just because they don't use self18:45
*** barclaac has joined #openstack-lbaas18:58
rm_youblogan: well, otherwise you're artificially restricting when the method can be run, for no reason18:58
rm_youi have definitely had times where I was trying to do something and it was telling me "you must have an instance of <whatever>" for no good reason18:59
*** barclaac|2 has quit IRC19:01
bloganwell why would you want to call a method that was meant to be a private instance method that happened to not use self?19:03
*** xgerman_ has joined #openstack-lbaas19:03
bloganfrom outside that class19:03
bloganrm_you: and in that case, tagging it as a classmethod would solve your problem too19:04
bloganjohnsom: did you get my comment about having to retrieve the loadbalancer and amphora again in thsoe methods?19:08
rm_workblogan: well, if it doesn't use self or cls, but is only intended to be used as a private instance method, someone has done some strange design19:11
rm_workthere's no real reason for something to BE a private instance method, unless it uses things from the instance <_<19:12
openstackgerritAnand Shanmugam proposed openstack/neutron-lbaas: Adding code to prevent vip port deletion from port api
*** xgerman_ has quit IRC19:13
bloganrm_work: you mean decomposing a large method into smaller digestable chunks even if those chunks don't use instance state is bad design?19:13
rm_workin itself is not bad design, but expecting them to still be private instance methods is ????19:14
rm_workonce you've done that, there's no point in them being restricted to either private or instance, really19:14
rm_workother than having a clean namespace19:14
rm_workpeople can run them all they want and it won't hurt your class -- now, keeping them "private" might be good to indicate that their functionality might change (and avoid introducing a contract)19:16
rm_workbut still zero reason for them to be instance restricted19:16
rm_workall you'd be doing is forcing someone to make a fake/throwaway instance so they can call your function19:16
rm_workwhich, again, I have done in the past19:17
rm_work(while shaking my fist in the air at the original author)19:17
rm_workjust not a fan of being unnecessarily restrictive based on "one current view of the situation"19:18
blogani think if you're calling a private method from the outside you're doing it wrong19:22
bloganor the class you're calling doesn't give you the public methods that you need19:23
rm_workeh, sometimes there are situations when you need to do something the original developer didn't expect but don't want to patch their code directly19:39
rm_workit happens19:39
bloganmonkey patch!19:40
johnsomblogan Yes, I'm just not sure it matters in the flow.  It's on my list to look at.  The comment about the taskflow settings didn't make sense for me.  Those are configurable items we set when starting up the tasklow engine.19:44
bloganjohnsom: yeah the taskflow settings i thought were taskflow defined, but you're right19:45
johnsomOk, cool19:45
bloganjohnsom: but it does matter in the flow because passing in the lb in the store, means lb.amphorae will always be an empty list, just like would always be None19:45
bloganjohnsom: so you do checks on if exists in the networkign tasks19:46
*** BrianShang_ has joined #openstack-lbaas19:46
johnsomAh.  Ok, I will look at that.  I can create a task that refreshes those and rebind them into the flow19:46
bloganjohnsom: even though in the db that relationship exists, the amphora passed in has not been updated to reflect that19:46
*** BrianShang has quit IRC19:46
bloganjohnsom: okay that'd work, do you think there is a way to just do that in the task that updates them? so you don't always have to use that task over and over?19:47
*** crc32 has joined #openstack-lbaas19:48
blogani guess with taskflow the proper way is to create a separate task to do that so it can revert19:48
johnsomYeah, probably.  The only reason I would do another task is if I need to reuse it.19:48
bloganyeah and im sure you will need to19:48
*** crc32 has quit IRC19:49
bloganjohnsom: anyway im testing this with the actual drivers and actual neutron and nova19:49
johnsomMe too19:49
johnsomFixing bugs as I go.19:50
bloganyeah im trying to add comments as i find them, but learning taskflow int he process has slowed it down a bit19:50
bloganthat and i think i found a bug, write a huge comment only to find out that its not19:50
bloganlike the create lb without a READY amphora available, which you commented on19:51
johnsomTell me about it, the learning curve on a number of things has slowed it down.19:51
johnsomI have everything down to pools working with a few workarounds (the amp IP issue, etc.) Members aren't being generated, so need to debug that.19:52
blogandebugging taskflow is bit of a pita as well, but its just a change in mentality really19:53
johnsomGood news is the pool is created now and updates correctly, so my basic taskflow premise seems to be working19:53
bloganjohnsom: yeah it looks like its working, but just gotta get around these bugs19:53
bloganif this didn't have bugs i'd be worried something was wrong lol19:54
johnsomWith any luck I can get through the bugs today and create the rest of the objects.19:54
johnsomFYI, we have a etherpad of known issues we are working on:
johnsomAish, Min, and German are helping out in parallel19:55
bloganis #1 still an issue after your fix?19:55
johnsomAl as well, but he is on vacation for a bit19:55
bloganwhat a salcker19:55
johnsomYeah, I botched the fix19:55
bloganand slacker19:55
bloganwell you're nto the first loo19:55
johnsomThe imported configs didn't have those settings even though I thought they did19:56
bloganfrom keystonemiddleware?19:57
johnsomOne of us just needs to add those config settings independent of the imported configs.20:00
blogani honestly dont know why keystonemiddleware wouldn't register those options20:03
johnsomYeah, me either.  I assume it's a matter of timing20:03
*** xgerman_ has joined #openstack-lbaas20:06
*** barclaac has quit IRC20:13
dougwigis using lp for bugs something we don't want to do?20:13
dougwignot arguing, serious question.20:13
johnsomThis isn't merged code, so not sure it's the right place.  Really it was a place for me to put issues about the patchset so other folks on our team could help out.20:15
johnsomTypically I think lp for bugs is a good thing20:17
dougwigi'm cool either way.  was just curious, thanks.20:20
* johnsom wondering if dougwig was talking on a different thread20:21
dougwigno, same thread.20:21
blogani was going to ask the same thing but i think with the enormous amounts of bug that anyone could find, it would all be noise, i was thinking bugs in lp would be put in place after teh demo20:22
xgerman_yep, lp for mered code/afterd emo20:36
xgerman_if it's for a patch jus put it in comments20:36
*** xgerman has quit IRC20:38
*** mwang2 has joined #openstack-lbaas20:41
*** crc32 has joined #openstack-lbaas20:43
*** BrianShang_ has quit IRC20:52
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas20:53
johnsomQuestion on the, line 36 has "ACTIVE_PENDING_STATUSES = constants.SUPPORTED_PROVISIONING_STATUSES +" but the check below for member is "member.operating_status in ACTIVE_PENDING_STATUSES"20:57
johnsomAre we intentionally breaking the supported operating statuses here on purpose or are those mixed by accident?20:58
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-lbaas21:01
*** BrianShang has quit IRC21:04
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas21:05
*** BrianShang has quit IRC21:09
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas21:11
*** BrianShang has quit IRC21:17
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas21:18
*** BrianShang has quit IRC21:24
*** barclaac has joined #openstack-lbaas21:24
*** barclaac|2 has joined #openstack-lbaas21:25
bloganptoohill: ^^21:25
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas21:25
blogani woudln't think the operating status wouldn't be in the decision to render a member21:26
ptoohillMy comp is bugging and bouncing on/off irc. I dont see anything above the '^'21:26
bloganjust provisioning status21:26
blogan15:58:06         johnsom | Question on the, line 36 has "ACTIVE_PENDING_STATUSES = constants.SUPPORTED_PROVISIONING_STATUSES +" but the check below for member is                    │21:27
blogan                                     │                      │                         | "member.operating_status in ACTIVE_PENDING_STATUSES"                                                                                                                   │21:27
blogan                                     │                      │15:58:50         johnsom | Are we intentionally breaking the supported operating statuses here on purpose or are those mixed by accident?21:27
bloganweechat is not good at copying multiple lines21:27
johnsomQuestion on the, line 36 has "ACTIVE_PENDING_STATUSES = constants.SUPPORTED_PROVISIONING_STATUSES +" but the check below for member is "member.operating_status in ACTIVE_PENDING_STATUSES"21:27
johnsomAre we intentionally breaking the supported operating statuses here on purpose or are those mixed by accident?21:27
*** barclaac has quit IRC21:28
ptoohillNot doing anything on purpose. This was basically pulled from what was in neutron-lbaas. Its quite possible this was something overlooked21:28
ptoohillchecking out code to jog memory21:29
johnsomCool, thanks21:29
*** BrianShang has quit IRC21:32
ptoohillThis might have been leftover from something we needed in neutron-lbaas. though that may not be a thing anymore either and this coudl possibly change in both places. This checked shouldnt include 'DEGRADED' is what youre getting at here?21:32
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas21:33
ptoohillI guess im not sure what the issue is with this as im kind of unclear with the statuses between neutron-lbaas/octavia.21:35
johnsomptoohill Well, I wouldn't expect SUPPORTED_PROVISIONING_STATUSES in the operating_status21:35
ptoohillOk, then this may just be leftover that needed updating for octavia and was overlooked21:35
ptoohillWhat should this be?21:35
johnsomWe don't have provisioning_status on members21:36
ptoohillim sorry, im doing things for v1 and having issues with comp and plumbers. today is fun day21:36
johnsomJust operating_status21:37
bloganlol good point21:37
bloganwell then i don't think we need that check at all then? why would operating status come into the decision of whether the member should be in the config?21:37
bloganafter the demo, we need to align the nlbaas and octavia apis as much as we can21:38
johnsomI agree, the only thought I have is if we are using OFFLINE to exclude it from the config21:38
johnsomblogan +121:38
johnsomThis stuff got me confused more than once....21:38
blogani would think that check would be covered for enabled, because if it was haproxy that reported it being OFFLINE we'd still want it in the config21:39
*** BrianShang has quit IRC21:39
johnsomRight, I guess we have 'enabled' for excluding it.21:39
bloganwell its the result of neutron-lbaas's API changing a lot because Octavia's was done back when neutron-lbaas was much closer to this21:39
johnsomSo, yeah, maybe take the check for status out....21:40
bloganmoving targets suck21:40
ptoohillI can certainly do that. I apologize, a lot of this was 'cp', just hope I didnt miss much more ><21:40
dougwigblogan: heh, you moved it.  :)21:40
blogandougwig: i was trying to please everyone!21:40
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas21:41
bloganptoohill: we'll find whatever else has been missed21:41
bloganbut wouldn't hurt to comb over those jinja files for other things21:42
*** bharath has quit IRC21:42
*** bharath has joined #openstack-lbaas21:42
johnsomI think is wrong in there too, but I have a problem where it's not finding the health_monitor on the pool so haven't hit it yet21:43
*** BrianShang has quit IRC21:46
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas21:48
*** BrianShang has quit IRC21:55
madhu_akQuick question: what is the use of admin_state_up field when creating loadbalancer?21:56
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas21:57
madhu_akIf it is set to false, shouldn't the 'operating_status' set to DISABLED?22:01
*** BrianShang has quit IRC22:01
madhu_ak  <--22:01
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas22:03
*** barclaac|2 has quit IRC22:05
bloganmadhu_ak: yes it should22:06
madhu_akyou meant, the operating_status should be disabled right?22:07
*** barclaac has joined #openstack-lbaas22:07
madhu_akblogan ^^22:08
bloganmadhu_ak: yes22:08
madhu_akso there is a bug then22:08
*** barclaac has quit IRC22:08
*** BrianShang has quit IRC22:12
madhu_akagain provisioning status should be shown as OFFLINE when admin_state_up is set to False..Is that right? blogan22:13
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas22:13
ptoohillyoure asking about both provisioning and operating status madhu_ak ?22:17
*** jorgem has quit IRC22:19
*** BrianShang has quit IRC22:19
ptoohillI'm not quite positive to be honest. But i believe its just the operating status that will be set to offline. Im probably wrong about this as im still unclear/havnt dug in to fullly understand the statues22:23
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas22:23
madhu_akyeah, IMO, it should be: operating_status=DISABLED and provisioning_status=OFFLINE when I set admin_state_up=False22:24
crc32madhu_ak: the operating status being set to DISABLED is only in the return of the statuses call. ITs not set in the database.22:25
crc32what behavior are you expecting?22:25
ptoohillI think he wants to clear up that both operating status and provisioning status should have a status that is consistent with the admin_state_up=False. Though, what are you seeing now?22:27
*** amotoki has quit IRC22:27
madhu_akthis is the response I am seeing22:27
ptoohillah, then this may be a bug. crc32 did a lot with the status tree and could probably answer this better then me at this point22:28
*** BrianShang has quit IRC22:28
crc32Just wondering but if you call statuses on the same loadbalancer what do you see?22:29
crc32I didn't mangle the return calls on any operations other then statuses.22:29
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas22:30
madhu_akyep, for the first time, I could see provisioning_status as pending update and then if I get it on the lb once again, I could it is showing as ONLINE22:30
madhu_akI just logged an issue, but feel free to edit the issue..22:34
openstackLaunchpad bug 1449286 in neutron "lb's operating_status is not in DISABLED state when an user creates a loadbalancer with admin_state_up field as 'False'" [Undecided,New]22:34
crc32I was asking what you got when you hit statuses call.22:35
madhu_akokay let me check22:35
crc32the one that returns the entire tree22:36
madhu_akyou meant, GET on:
*** BrianShang has quit IRC22:37
crc32I'm building my deps now. There was supposed to be a call like /lbaas/loadbalancers/id/statuses or something like that. I'm looking through the docs for the actual call.22:38
crc32Looks like the doc has a bug in it as well. They show the call as "GET /lbaas/loadbalancers/loadbalancer_id/statuses " but then in the example the "statuses" portion of the URI is left off.22:39
madhu_akI see what you are saying22:39
madhu_akwhen I do: GET
madhu_akthere it is showing correctly.. Is that we supposed to check in this way?22:41
crc32"disabled" never hits the database. Its just dynamically returned in the status tree call.22:41
crc32but Im guessing it should be consistant as well.22:41
madhu_akaah, I see22:41
crc32I only worked on the dynamic tree part but I can see how its confusing. I'll ask brandon if we should modify the POST calls to reflect DISABLED as well.22:42
madhu_akyep crc32, you are right22:42
madhu_akdo you think it should be okay with the issue that I logged on?22:43
crc32the idea was that we didn't want to return degraded if the user deliberatly set admin_state_up=False.22:43
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas22:43
madhu_akexactly..even I spent sometime to understand the use of admin_state_up field..22:43
crc32yea I think it needs to be addressed since it confused me as well. I'll let the cores deside though.22:44
madhu_akactually we are writing tempest tests using ddt, so figured out the behavior now22:44
madhu_akthanks for the confirmation22:44
crc32provstatus can stay as "ACTIVE" though. Provisioning status is just there to show if the entity is in a transitional state. It can be active even if the operating status is degraded.22:44
madhu_akIs there a way to edit the doc myself?22:46
*** BrianShang has quit IRC22:47
madhu_akokay, I think I can edit the doc, but will let the cores to decide though22:48
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas22:49
crc32I think this is probably a tad more confusing.22:51
madhu_akhe he22:52
*** BrianShang has quit IRC22:54
*** bharath has quit IRC22:55
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas22:55
*** bharath has joined #openstack-lbaas22:56
*** mlavalle has quit IRC23:02
*** BrianShang has quit IRC23:03
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas23:04
*** crc32 has quit IRC23:08
*** BrianShang has quit IRC23:10
madhu_akdougwig, blogan, ptoohill:
openstackLaunchpad bug 1449286 in neutron "lb's operating_status is not in DISABLED state when an user creates a loadbalancer with admin_state_up field as 'False'" [Undecided,New]23:11
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas23:20
*** BrianShang has quit IRC23:24
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas23:25
*** BrianShang has quit IRC23:36
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas23:37
*** BrianShang has quit IRC23:43
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas23:48
*** BrianShang_ has joined #openstack-lbaas23:52
*** BrianShang has quit IRC23:53
*** BrianShang_ has quit IRC23:56
*** BrianShang has joined #openstack-lbaas23:58

Generated by 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!