16:59:03 #startmeeting keystone 16:59:04 Meeting started Tue Aug 25 16:59:03 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is knikolla. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:59:05 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:59:06 o/ 16:59:08 The meeting name has been set to 'keystone' 16:59:13 o/ 16:59:17 o/ 17:00:07 how's everyone? 17:01:29 good. How are you? 17:01:31 pretty good 17:03:37 can't complain. 17:03:56 i'll give it a few more minutes to see if we have some form of quorum. 17:04:20 ok 17:04:54 hi rafaelweingartne. thanks for joining us and for the feature proposals. 17:06:03 Welcome :). I will try to be more present in the future 17:07:51 I think we can get started for now 17:08:06 #topic Code Reviews 17:08:42 rafaelweingartne has proposed https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1887515 17:08:43 Launchpad bug 1887515 in OpenStack Identity (keystone) "[RFE] Keystone to honor the "domain" attribute mapping rules" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Rafael Weingartner (rafaelweingartner) 17:09:00 to have keystone honor the domain specified in the mapping rules 17:10:27 I have some requests too #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737225/ 17:10:27 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/746451/ 17:10:27 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/745112/ 17:10:27 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/745376/ 17:10:27 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/657039/ 17:10:43 o/ 17:11:45 cmurphy: lbragstad: with regards to https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1887515 do you think it warrants a spec? 17:11:47 Launchpad bug 1887515 in OpenStack Identity (keystone) "[RFE] Keystone to honor the "domain" attribute mapping rules" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Rafael Weingartner (rafaelweingartner) 17:12:19 knikolla: i lean toward yes since it's an API change 17:12:24 that was my doubt, sometimes I am not sure if things need a spec or not. Therefore, I normally propose the RFE, and wait for the community to decide. 17:12:48 The API is not actually changing, but the way we handle the attribute mapping extensions 17:13:10 A new parameter is being introduced. If we consider that an API, then, yes, it is changing 17:13:56 ohh changing the api behavior is even more worth a spec 17:14:05 ++ 17:14:24 that is why I introduced the parameter 17:14:24 introducing a configuration option on the backend that changes the api behavior is problematic 17:14:46 the behavior does not change by default, only if the schema is updated to 1.1 that it would change 17:15:03 the user needs some way to know what the behavior will be without knowing how the operator has configured the server 17:15:37 I thought that only operators would add IdPs in OpenStack 17:16:05 since that we need to change configs in Keystone anyways 17:16:23 such as the Apache's webproxy configurations 17:16:43 it is not something that a comon user can do 17:17:02 common/normal 17:18:22 yes, that is true 17:20:13 rafaelweingartne: i would still like to see a spec, since they provide better visibility into the direction the project is taking as opposed to RFEs in bugs. 17:20:31 no problem, I can create one 17:20:56 if you guys think that the RFE can be approved 17:21:18 rafaelweingartne: it does make sense to me 17:21:33 and provides better consistency across how we handle domain in mappings 17:21:57 could you create a spec for https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742235/ as well? 17:22:20 aha, you were faster 17:22:37 I woudl bring this one to the table only later when moving on with this one 17:23:01 that is the reason why I started working with a method to handle attribute mapping schema versions 17:23:09 sure, I can create for that other one as well 17:24:05 rafaelweingartne: the versioning makes total sense and is something we considered too. 17:24:22 it is something i would lean more towards being in the mapping itself rather than a global config though. 17:24:40 ah 17:24:42 good idea 17:25:38 ok, so how does that work. I mean, I create the specs and we discuss in the patch of the spec? Or, do we discuss them in the next meeting? 17:26:21 rafaelweingartne: both are valid approaches, as long as the meeting discussion is also captured and written in the spec review. 17:26:35 I see 17:27:24 we are also late in this cycle for them to get approved for V. So they'd have to be pushed to W. 17:27:43 that is fine by me 17:28:06 Assuming there are no strong objections with both specs, and the implementation is done, we can merge them pretty early on in the cycle. 17:28:10 internally, we already have them in PROD, so now we would like to work with the community to upstream these nice things that we created 17:28:34 rafaelweingartne: totally, always happy to have stuff flow upstream. 17:28:38 sure, I will work on them in the next coming days 17:29:06 i'd also love to hear what other needs you have with regards to federation going forward. 17:29:23 a lot :) 17:29:34 we have had very limited success engaging and gathering feedback. 17:29:34 we have been fixing and patchign things in Kolla-ansible 17:29:54 and now we started moving to the Keystone and Horizon patches 17:30:31 We are managing our users just via identity federation, role assignments, projects, and so on. 17:31:04 we do that to have a solid and centralized place for user managements, since we have much more than just OpenStack in our clients cloud 17:31:37 i will definitely pick your brain 17:32:34 just ping me, I am not normally on IRC, but you can drop me an email 17:32:45 will do! thanks! 17:37:13 ok, looks like i have already reviewed most of the review requests, that's a first. 17:37:44 i still haven't gotten to cmurphy's RBAC test series from last week, but i'm heavily caffeinated especially for that right now. 17:38:01 :) 17:39:33 #topic Bugs 17:40:31 Going through bugs... there doesn't seem to be anything worth bringing up in the meeting 17:40:41 #topic Open Floor 17:41:16 Somehow I had missed the email saying that the W release is called Wallaby 17:42:08 sorry, lost the internet connection 17:43:06 rafaelweingartne: you didn't really miss anything. 17:43:10 no worries 17:44:27 alright, thanks for coming everyone. :) 17:44:30 #endmeeting