15:00:07 #startmeeting ironic 15:00:07 Meeting started Mon Feb 24 15:00:07 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rpittau. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:07 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:07 The meeting name has been set to 'ironic' 15:00:24 Hello everyone! 15:00:24 Welcome to our weekly meeting! 15:00:24 The meeting agenda can be found here: 15:00:24 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic#Agenda_for_February_24.2C_2025 15:01:22 o/ 15:02:10 o/ 15:02:17 let's wait a couple of minutes for people to join :) 15:02:23 o/ 15:02:29 o/ 15:02:41 o/ 15:02:49 I forgot to add it to the agenda but can we discuss sushy release? 15:02:50 o/ 15:02:59 well I think we're good with quorum :) 15:03:07 cardoe: it's there actually, I added it 15:03:20 #topic Announcements/Reminders 15:03:31 Standing reminder to review patches tagged ironic-week-prio and to hashtag any patches ready for review with ironic-week-prio: 15:03:31 #link https://tinyurl.com/ironic-weekly-prio-dash 15:04:20 some patches to review there, need to get them quick as the time is running out for the release 15:04:23 o/ 15:04:53 #info 2025.1 Epoxy Release Schedule 15:04:53 #link https://releases.openstack.org/epoxy/schedule.html 15:04:57 I will prioritize review in sushy, I was on PTO 15:05:04 we're at R-5 ! 15:05:12 feature freeze is upon us 15:05:16 o/ 15:05:40 so anything that we want to go in Epoxy needs to merge before EoW 15:06:19 I will also start working on the cycle highlights that are due next week 15:07:05 #info Flamingo PTG will take place place April 7-11, 2025! 15:07:05 don't forget to register! 15:07:05 the etherpad is ready here: 15:07:05 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/ironic-ptg-april-2025 15:07:51 grrr there was something I was suppose to add there. 15:08:11 anything else to announce/remind ? 15:08:27 Ironic is DPL; or will be at the flip of the cycle. 15:08:36 I will work with TC to ensure that change merges 15:08:47 tks JayF 15:08:58 yep, when Epoxy is released ironic will switch to DPL 15:09:14 * JayF hands rpittau his "Last PTL of Ironic Ever (maybe)" sash 15:09:19 :D 15:09:42 thanks! 15:10:09 anything else or we can move to the discussion topics? 15:11:13 ok moving on 15:11:13 #topic Discussion Topics 15:11:33 #info migrate sushy-oem-idrac to sushy 15:11:33 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/sushy/+/940557 15:11:47 I guess we need to move this to the next cycle 15:12:04 sushy release is already late 15:12:12 Well, we can do it, it just won't make this cycle 15:12:16 yeah 15:12:25 that's what I meant :) 15:12:26 omg +6550 15:12:27 I just don't know what we need to do. 15:12:28 and by do it, I mean approve the patches right now 15:12:36 Cause it works. 15:12:49 It even installs along side together just fine 15:12:59 It's just "wrong" to install both" 15:13:03 it's a last minute huge change 15:13:15 yeah; it seems like the ideal thing to have at the top of the cycle 15:13:17 and IMHO we probably need to deprecate sushy-oem-idrac first 15:13:32 I know it's painful to wait but it's extremely good it's lined up 15:13:48 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/942520 is all that ironic needed. 15:13:49 cardoe: you did a great job, thanks a lot for that :) 15:14:10 I'm good with pushing to the next cycle and deprecating sushy-oem-idrac first. 15:14:24 that's another last minute change, FF is this week 15:14:35 cardoe: perfect 15:14:36 thanks 15:14:42 Traditionally Ironic hasn't complied with overall OpenStack FF 15:14:53 those are usually for cycle-with-rc, not cycle-with-intermediary 15:14:53 ++ 15:14:54 I just want to know WHAT we want to do to formally merge it all. 15:15:28 If it's co-installable, we might JFDI right after branching ironic 15:15:39 yep 15:15:53 ++ 15:15:56 I'd say we can merge the sushy change whenever, but wait for the ironic one 15:16:14 This may cause troubles for people consuming master 15:16:19 but probably not critical troubles 15:17:08 I dunno what trouble it will cause for packagers. Cause they do install the same file (for the entry point). And while pip doesn't care. An RPM built up from a Python package might care if they both install the same file? 15:17:10 mmmm well it won't be released, so if we see issues we're more relaxed in fixing them 15:17:28 So I'd rather hold off and understand WHAT I need to do to communicate the change the best way. 15:17:51 But that's what I'm saying.. I dunno how to best communicate that. 15:18:02 production RPMs usually are built from releases, not from master 15:18:30 yeah, I'm just being overly cautious 15:18:37 :) 15:18:45 but *at latest* when Ironic is branches we should just merge everything 15:18:50 * is branched 15:18:54 yep 15:19:22 I'll release the krak... the sushy release then 15:20:33 pull the lever! 15:20:41 done! :D 15:20:42 ship it! 15:20:52 cardoe: I just udpated the ironic change so it's clear what we need to do 15:21:18 the sushy change can go in at will 15:21:57 are we good to move on? 15:23:00 ok! 15:23:17 #info ironic-lib deprecation 15:23:17 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22ironic-lib-deprecation%22 15:23:38 I think we're waiting for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/939278 ? 15:23:53 yes, I'll nudge TC about that, too 15:23:59 thanks JayF :) 15:24:33 any other discussion topics for today? 15:25:14 RFEs 15:25:26 cid: yes! 15:25:32 which one(s) ? 15:26:10 This, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2098884 15:26:26 I have updated the agenda with the links to the rest. 15:27:00 I assume (cc: TheJulia) that the redfish serial interface is shaped similarly to the ipmi stuff? 15:27:06 If so, seems like an obvious JFDI 15:27:17 JayF: It really doesn't exist afaik 15:27:28 Well, it can be over IPMI or SSH 15:27:28 then what is the RFE wanting us to do? 15:27:31 (or OEM, yay) 15:27:36 wait, what 15:27:37 well, true, it can be 15:27:51 redfish bmcs expose serial consoles over ipmi, is that what you just said? 15:27:53 JayF: Redfish specifies IPMI or SSH as possible protocols for serial console :) 15:27:56 I've *yet* to see a bmc that offers that though 15:28:01 \o/ 15:28:20 possible being the magical aspect :) 15:28:22 oroborous is gonna sue hardware companies for gimmick infringement lol 15:28:27 If we did not have a VPN outage, I would check our internal Redfish dumps 15:28:37 wheeeeeeee 15:28:51 Anyway, yeah, given its a possible option, jfdi just seems to make sense to me 15:29:10 TheJulia: is what you offer basically just adding ipmitool-socat to the list of supported interfaces? 15:29:16 I.e. without actually checking the Redfish data? 15:29:34 I assume we'd actually need some glue code, the RFE implies we'd have to do some credential and metadata passing 15:30:08 dtantsur: Thinking so *and* likely allowing the ipmitool exec code to understand it can grab username/password/host address from the redfish fields 15:30:41 TheJulia: does that just work? 15:30:51 I've not looked closely at it, so my brain is running form memory, but it should just work if the values are already populated for ipmi 15:31:03 and the interface is available/loaded 15:31:16 Hmm. I don't object to it, but let's make sure (naming etc) that we can introduce a more proper Redfish interface later (even if it looks unlikely right now) 15:31:23 https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/Redfish_Serial_Console_Enhancements_05-2020_WIP.pdf afaik is what I had bookmarked for changes 15:31:47 IPMISoCatConsoleViaRedfish console class coming up? :D 15:31:48 I suspect our introduced interfaces will be more-so graphical :) 15:31:50 but yeah 15:32:07 Eh, I suspect some folks would prefer ssh if we have a known working example 15:32:19 but I'm just trying to do the needful, not boil an ocean 15:32:33 * TheJulia is working on ocean boiling network switching at the moment 15:32:39 (well, testing) 15:34:26 ironic team, can somebody please point me to the code where connectivity between multinode devstack builds is configured on CI? I'm looking similar place https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-gate/+/335981/7/devstack-vm-gate.sh in zuul ansible roles 15:35:28 vsaienko: let's wait for after the meeting for that, thanks :) 15:35:58 There's a few more RFEs. Let's go through them. 15:36:16 cid said 4 but I see 5. :shifty: 15:36:28 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2098886 15:36:30 folk scan blame me for some of these, I was quickly filing bugs from discussions 15:36:32 :) 15:36:47 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2098886 15:36:53 To steal rpittau's thunder a little. 15:37:03 This one comes from a disucssion where someone conveyed they really neede to deploy a whole bunch of identical machines, and didn't care about fine details 15:37:21 and didn't also care about much of the openstacky primitives 15:37:30 Oh. TheJulia is going to hate me, but this should be reworked in terms of allocations and ideally the deployment API 15:37:31 they just wanted it to be single-action oriented 15:37:40 maybe not allocations, maybe only the deployment API.. 15:37:54 The key aspet is they are just a tenant with restricted views and basically wanted bulk deployments 15:38:17 dtantsur: actually, I was kind of thinking something along the basic idea but sans allocations since that is something else they need to interact with 15:38:25 basically, they just want a bulk interactions interface 15:38:31 where the conductor can solve the details 15:38:45 But in all honesty.. it's a simple loop in Python, no? 15:38:45 I realize, the idea needs a lot of work, so its fine if people want to put notes in and we can move on 15:38:59 they don't want to have to think/manage at that level 15:39:02 I think a much bigger usability issue is the lack of a deployment API, which caused metalsmith 15:39:03 I don't really like the idea of that at all tbh 15:39:09 == dtantsur 15:39:25 if we have deployment API, what you need would be 4 lines of Python probably 15:39:36 They don't want that, they want a single rest call. 15:39:40 So honestly I think this puts complexity into Ironic that should really be done by the caller of the API. 15:39:50 fair enough 15:40:00 Cause what should be the result if 1 fails and 3 succeed cause of locking? 15:40:02 I mean, I'd rather them have a short script or client hack than have ironic do a bad job of batching 15:40:04 I'm just the proxy, I'm not going to advocate endlessly for this 15:40:12 because it's not... ^^^ yes exactly cardoe is going down my path 15:40:32 My comment is not a hard no, but I pretty firmly believe we need to solve the general deployment UX first 15:40:44 yeah; have a "deploy one in one rest API call" 15:40:49 before "deploy many in one rest API call" 15:41:09 I sort of think one of the next ones actually approaches that, so I think we can carry on to the next rfe? 15:42:26 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2098888 15:42:57 Feels like a better replacement for shellinabox? 15:43:09 I'm assuming the mechanism for this would be a sidecar container, like for redfish gfx console? 15:43:28 I'd prefer something like this not end up with ssh connections routed through/proxied by a conductor 15:43:41 Yeah, I'm also curious about technical details, but the idea sounds good 15:44:21 Socat console would get you a graphical console 15:44:31 this is just... ssh wrapping the connection 15:45:07 JayF: to be determined, but if we follow the existing model of console interfaces each responsible conductor would manage the "sshds" 15:45:31 I have a lot of security nervousness if those sshds are colocated with the conductor, but that's implementation detail territory 15:45:39 indeed 15:45:43 I potential issue may be the requirements on root access 15:45:56 We've just got rid of oslo.rootwrap 15:46:19 Could be a case for a small companion service 15:46:20 at least a long time ago, you could invoke sshd without root if you were doing a highly sepcific configuraiton 15:46:32 hmmm 15:46:45 I'd read a more detailed proposal, be it in a spec or simply on LP 15:46:49 specific configurations would be be the soup of the day for something like this 15:46:50 but I'm not against the idea 15:46:55 ack 15:46:58 TheJulia: yeah you can do that with a user config 15:47:06 rpittau: yup 15:47:10 Yeah the idea seems good here but likely valuable to write more details (if it were me I'd do a spec) 15:47:27 We really need some form between an RFE and a spec 15:47:44 Okay, onward! 15:47:45 or just add more details to the RFE ? 15:47:47 eh; I think it's mainly "don't be a stick in the mud when reviewing specs for minor things" :D 15:47:59 true :D 15:48:01 I appreciate the structure, but maybe that's just me 15:48:59 onward? 15:49:12 onward! 15:50:40 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2098694 15:51:38 Just an idea placeholder for the aformentioned serial console topic 15:51:41 I guess the blocking concern is lack of hardware? 15:51:44 is that a differently worded version of the other two RFEs we've looked at around ssh->socat and ipmi-over-redfish consoles? 15:52:03 I was wondering the same 15:52:12 I added this one as "we should look into this in general, not specifically" 15:52:36 so there is no ipmi-over-redfish console and this is entirely unrelated to ssh->socat->ipmitool sol 15:53:06 I'm happy for the feature to exist; but I would not have a use case or consume it :) 15:53:08 This might be a source of redfish-ssh console or soemthing like that 15:53:24 This is probably ENEEDSPEC 15:53:37 Generally valid idea but we don't have enough information to approve it 15:53:49 seems like this is less an RFE at this point and more a place to put research until we see what the feature owuld loook like 15:53:57 ++ 15:54:07 +1 15:54:55 RFE: research for enhancement lol 15:55:09 :D 15:55:10 :) 15:55:23 next (and last) one ? 15:55:39 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2099906 15:56:03 wait, really? 15:56:08 +2 JFDI 15:56:26 yep not a lot to discuss there 15:56:42 What do ya want the field called? 15:56:45 Is it similar to node.description? 15:56:52 because it sounds like node.description 15:57:00 a port.description filed? 15:57:02 field 15:57:05 * TheJulia cannot type today 15:57:12 port.description works for me. 15:57:17 sounds good 15:57:25 so one last item I wanted to bring up 15:57:28 if we've got time 15:57:38 we have 2:25 minutes :) 15:57:43 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/2098697 15:58:25 A solid idea, definitely needs a spec in my book 15:58:27 The idea is "it would be really nice if we didn't have to think in neutron primitives and have a vif" so to enable a model where ironic can fill the gap to it's neutron preferred data model, or even non-neutron usage models with some automatic logic 15:58:37 Well, I wonder if at the PTG 15:58:54 we should try to have a chat with neutron/nova/ironic devs and see if there's a better path forward including ideas like this 15:59:20 This is semi-disjointed, because a nova user will always send us a vif 15:59:23 (that's not an instead; that's an in-addition-to / as a part of) 15:59:25 well, nova will do it 15:59:38 TheJulia: well, I'm asking, is there a world where there'd be value in Nova not doing it, and Ironic doing it 15:59:41 nova (last time I looked) had paths to magically get you a vif 16:00:15 It seems like pushing some of the network config to Ironic/neutron without nova involved could lead to more flexibility, especially for cases where you are owner/lessee and have some control over the node 16:00:22 I would avoid nova like the plauge since nova has all of the logic "if we get handed a network, we need to do x, if we get handed a this other value we need to do y logic" 16:00:47 ack 16:00:51 Gonna have to chat with the nova folks about that change. 16:01:08 I know they've been breaking out the vif bits into a separate os-vif library. 16:01:17 I'm just thinking, is there a path to make the non-nova user life easier 16:01:28 non-nova but with neutron? 16:01:31 yup 16:01:34 metalsmith-style 16:01:36 okay, yeah 16:01:38 or, potentially without 16:02:16 sort of depends on where the matrix needs to end up overall, but not trying to join other stuff together in a grand vision at the moment 16:02:30 hopefully, that makes sense 16:03:20 I understand, I do worry sometimes that we haven't taken a high level view of the integrated process in a while, and often assume that the status quo is unchangable 16:03:20 we can bring up the topic next time for a deeper discussion if needed, or even add something to the PTG etherpad 16:03:31 I wanted to imagine for a second that we could change the status quo :) 16:04:25 alright thanks everyone, going to close the meeting now :) 16:04:30 #endmeeting