15:01:23 #startmeeting openstack_ansible_meeting 15:01:23 Meeting started Tue Sep 1 15:01:23 2026 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is noonedeadpunk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:01:23 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:01:23 The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_ansible_meeting' 15:01:31 #topic rollcall 15:01:34 o/ hey there 15:01:37 o/ hello 15:03:55 #topic releases 15:04:13 so I have completely missed 2024.2 EOL deadline 15:04:21 and frankly clean forgot about it at all 15:04:40 during this week roles have been EOLed and branches dropped 15:05:03 now the only part left is integrated repo 15:05:06 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/1002737 15:05:23 surprisingly, CI looks quite functional, with exception of upgrade jobs 15:05:57 so potentially it should be votable soonish 15:06:13 second part are periodic releases of stable branches 15:06:27 frankly, I am waiting for keystone backports to merge now 15:07:00 to make sure new point releases contain fixes for OSSA-2026-037 among other things 15:07:38 and keystone CI fails intermittently so far 15:08:56 so while we are waiting, we might want to merge the sha bump for octavia specifically, to unblock backports to 2026.1 15:08:57 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/1003256 15:09:18 Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia stable/2026.1: Return ZooKeeper https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia/+/999957 15:09:23 done 15:09:46 thanks! 15:10:02 and I don't have much to add on the topic here 15:11:35 #topic office hours 15:11:54 So there was a great patch pushed to the ops repo during previous week 15:11:58 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-ops/+/1002724 15:12:40 While we probably can merge it "as-is" I was thinking to spend couple of hours looking into how we may "collectify" it. 15:12:55 But this can be done as a follow-up as well, for sure 15:13:09 yes, i think in hindsight andrew feels it would have been better to make it so it runs from the deploy host, rather than independany 15:13:36 it ended up needing to understand to OSA inventory to get into some neutron containers 15:13:54 I guess the question is if we wanna work on this patch or merge it and do follow-ups? 15:14:19 I think that from our POV this has already taken so much time that we actually need to get on and do the migrations 15:15:05 I think I should be able to invest some time into it, as I am personally very interested in the topic 15:15:35 This is probably the most complete description of the steps involved anyone has made 15:15:42 ++ 15:16:29 ok, I think we can probably merge this and I will propose changes/refactoring as a follow up, to better keep history, and have smth out asap 15:16:55 Yeah, i think it would be good to put something on the ML too at some point 15:17:38 I will aim to get some time during this week for it 15:17:55 It looks like for us it is mostly all fine in OVN - just OVN FWaaS being stateless is a bit unfortunate 15:18:06 but andrew has been looking into that 15:18:25 I thought that fwaas does work with ovn these days? 15:18:44 yes, statless FW instead of connection tracked though 15:19:07 as well as vpnaas, just through spawning a good old namespace and wasting another IP 15:19:08 the old one that ran on the l3 agent was more powerful/easier for our use case 15:19:49 i think that there is an assumption that FW rules can be == to security groups 15:19:55 and thats kind of fine for VM 15:20:28 but when you have some random harware appliances also on your tenant networks next to the VM then you need something thats not security groups on a neutron port 15:21:50 yeah, totally 15:22:42 for some reason I thought that it was the same iptables in ip netns before the l3 router, so it had same feature set 15:23:17 but we're not using fwaas so I didn't dig deep enough there 15:25:16 this week I didn't have much progress on any of planned things, except finding couple of bugs in os_freezer role 15:26:04 first one is that freezer-api and freezer are 2 different packages, which I tried to wrap around with logic, and install them only whenever needed 15:26:28 which actually resulted in rebuilding requrements file, and triggerring venv/wheels rebuild as a result 15:26:59 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_freezer/+/1003087 15:27:51 And second issue I found in there, is that jobs directory, where scheduler places cached jobs from API, was in /etc/freezer, which is a symlink to venv, so when venv is being rebuild, these state files are lost. 15:28:05 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_freezer/+/1003081 15:29:11 Merged openstack/openstack-ansible-os_freezer master: Implement freezer-scheduler clustering support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_freezer/+/998718 15:29:39 we're having really good progress in deploying freezer in production now 15:29:48 still quite some work to do obviously 15:30:24 and I am expecting to have some more time on my hands once we're done with it. 15:30:43 i should look at freezer myself some more 15:31:07 Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia stable/2026.1: Use RHEL OS family for iptables persistence https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia/+/1003278 15:31:20 if you be looking, look at the master branch only. plenty of things were landed for 2026.2 in there 15:32:27 and the last topic that is around was pep503, but we've discussed it already quite extensively 15:32:32 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22osa/pep503%22 15:32:58 I don't think I have much more findings there, except fixed documentation and re-added example of passing custom pip.conf 15:33:22 and so far I decided not to go with this one 15:33:24 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-openstack_hosts/+/1001222 15:33:46 as I feel it as quite controversial in general.... 15:33:57 but dunno 15:34:36 Merged openstack/openstack-ansible-ops master: Add sample playbooks to aid in conversion from lxb to ovn https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-ops/+/1002724 15:37:28 thats relying on the repo server to fallback to a local mirror instead of using pip.conf? 15:38:27 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-openstack_hosts/+/1001222 is to actually manage pip.conf with osa role - the one I am not sure about 15:38:50 fallback from repo server to a local mirror so far looks as quite a good idea overall 15:38:51 yep 15:39:26 depending on the environment you might need that in place very early to then have anything else work 15:39:33 the thing is that if there is a pip.conf, pip will add the index-url to the list, and will consult it for each package request 15:39:58 which raises response/build time quite significantly 15:41:00 and the idea behind https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build/+/985531 is to produce proper simple repository confirmant for PIP to respect/trust it enough, with a fallback configured on repo server 15:42:10 well, I think openstack_hosts is actually early enough. But then fact of having pip.conf on hosts and/or containers is probably not always a good idea. and then upgrade path is very tricky 15:44:16 but yeah, I guess that's it from my side 15:45:41 Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_magnum master: Add information about manage configuration by OSA https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_magnum/+/972889 15:46:10 As of CI state. It seems that we're mostly good, but feels like quite some "intermittent" issues with magnum are happening 15:49:12 and mostly for EL distros, after 16gb instances were disabled for debian 15:49:42 as it's really a heavy test we're trying to run there... 16:11:25 #endmeeting