15:02:00 #startmeeting openstack_ansible_meeting 15:02:00 Meeting started Tue Feb 20 15:02:00 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is noonedeadpunk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:02:00 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:02:00 The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_ansible_meeting' 15:02:06 #topic roll call 15:02:10 hey 15:02:12 o/ hey everyone 15:04:39 o/ 15:04:59 running a bit late will be at my computer in 10 15:11:18 #topic office hours 15:11:25 Frankly speaking - I don't have much 15:11:29 (made it) 15:11:44 We had really teriffic bug fighting day 15:11:54 super nice to see bugs fitting just 2 pages :) 15:12:07 :D super sorry i wasn't able to participate.. that was.. a day 15:12:10 hopefully soonish will be able to iterate over ones on the etherpad 15:12:36 great job everyone 15:12:47 other then that - I failed to add us access to unmaintained branches. And Brians ML really confused me a lot 15:14:20 * noonedeadpunk looking through the review board 15:14:54 some backports are still pending to merge: https://review.opendev.org/q/parentproject:openstack/openstack-ansible+branch:%5Estable/.*+status:open+ 15:15:02 or pending for recheck... 15:17:40 i will poke at those in a bit 15:20:47 I guess once most important land - it should be time for another point releases and first minor release for 2023.2 15:20:58 it was never _that_ late frankly speaking... 15:21:14 The only known issue for upgrade might be missing rabbitmq flags actually 15:21:26 But they should be covered in OS upgrade right now at least... 15:21:52 We also had quite good progress on landing capi stuff 15:27:39 Merged openstack/openstack-ansible stable/2023.1: [doc] Remove guidance to drain RMQ which can result in failures https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/908801 15:28:53 but it feels that other goals for the release might not be met :( 15:29:17 ie - proxysql, incus, pki + vault integration 15:29:38 mainly because of me having hard times lately with ENOTIME 15:29:48 o/ sorry in too many meetings, here now 15:32:32 Though, we can potentially add some things for OVN 15:32:39 like vpnaas support 15:32:54 magnum stuff too 15:33:05 Ah, Octavia OVN support was in our list as well, and I think this patch is not fair enough to go 15:33:08 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia/+/868462 15:33:08 feels like endless yak shaving right now with that :/ 15:33:55 ugh, magnum actually fails with openstack_resources role on upgrade 15:34:06 I was never able to really reproduce the thing :( 15:34:48 it's not that I was able to spend enough time though :( but it was tricky to do so 15:35:12 maybe now when openstack_resources landed, it will be easier to do... 15:36:29 there is also still the patch for OVN + octavia, regardless of the ovn provider 15:36:35 thats totally broken right now in AIO 15:36:48 oh, btw. all fixes for quorum landed to oslo.messaging: https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bug-2031497%22 15:37:02 yes, true. 15:37:09 but it kinda works out of AIO 15:37:25 that is pretty much OK except that the patch needs to also work for !debians 15:37:49 i think it's ovs installation during bootstrap_host now working on centos/rocky 15:37:54 *not working 15:38:18 so... neutron was not failing on that 15:38:49 like this passed today: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_neutron/+/908341?tab=change-view-tab-header-zuul-results-summary 15:39:02 this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/894811 15:39:08 no idea what it testing though 15:39:17 the lbaas network is just not a thing currently in AIO 15:39:26 like totally broken 15:40:20 I guess we'd need a SIG for openvswitch? 15:40:26 It's not present in default repos 15:41:10 But also... It's weird we need to create ovs bridges in advance for octavia 15:41:28 we need to plumb the container bridges into the provider network 15:41:29 Shouldn't defining neutron_provider_networks do the trick? 15:41:53 well i'm not sure, this is why i asked jamesdenton and the result was that patch 15:41:59 https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_neutron/src/branch/master/tasks/providers/ovs_config.yml#L16 15:42:30 I think this runs both for OVS and OVN... But like not 100% sure. >90 though 15:43:02 ok, for OVN it's here: https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_neutron/src/branch/master/tasks/providers/setup_ovs_ovn.yml#L64-L86 15:43:06 but kinda same thing? 15:43:19 well also octavia role runs after neutron 15:43:27 yeah 15:43:30 so also i wonder if there is chicken/egg trouble 15:43:42 as there is network stuff defined in the octavia role 15:43:43 but if it's after - it should be fine... 15:44:03 and yes, octavia does create a neutron networks 15:44:21 Merged openstack/openstack-ansible stable/zed: [doc] Remove guidance to drain RMQ which can result in failures https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/908802 15:44:23 so I think defining decent neutron_provider_networks should be jsut fine 15:44:28 anyway this is pretty big deal, i think it means we're not really testing octavia properly right now 15:45:26 I can try to look into that actually and compary with what I have in our full-scale OVN sandbox 15:46:02 that would be very helpful, i don't have anything like that as reference 15:56:35 ok, good 15:57:07 as frankly for sandbox it worked really out of the box once I've defined proper mappings. 15:57:53 just matter of doing that through provider_networks in openstack_user_config... But I guess at worst we can just define neutron_provider_networks in user_vars_octavia or smth 15:58:36 the octavia patch just worked out of the box .. and everyone copied it over as a procedure, so until now no one tested it like you guys :) 15:59:44 i meant since br-vxlan br-vlan etc were necessary to be defined, even though br-lbaas was just a tag/patch on br-vlan, it took itself as a procedure 15:59:49 admin1: well. I made quite some clean-up of it, as there were never used variables added 15:59:57 and its not a biggie also that people complained 16:00:14 but yeah 16:00:17 out of dozens of steps to prepare the server and netplan, it became 1 more block of code 16:00:30 its like don't fix unless broken type of procedure :) 16:01:02 though an automated one will be nice as well .. no more /etc/rc.local stuff 16:01:33 #endmeeting