Updating samples #401
Updating samples #401
Conversation
fao89
commented
Sep 8, 2023
fao89
commented
- remove the symlinks
- update IPAM sample
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fao89 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
Build failed (check pipeline). Post https://review.rdoproject.org/zuul/buildset/983287b3c0b54df9bb5c413f479bcba9 ❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 11m 38s |
|
/test dataplane-operator-build-deploy-kuttl |
config/samples/dataplane_v1beta1_openstackdataplanenodeset_with_ipam.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| - name: Storage | ||
| subnetName: subnet1 | ||
| - name: Tenant | ||
| subnetName: subnet1 | ||
| managementNetwork: ctlplane |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is optional. should we drop it?
| managementNetwork: ctlplane | ||
| ansible: | ||
| ansibleUser: cloud-admin | ||
| ansibleUser: root |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Aren't we sticking with cloud-admin?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know we use cloud-admin for baremetal, but I believe install_yamls still using root: https://github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/install_yamls/blob/main/devsetup/scripts/gen-edpm-compute-node.sh#L220
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably decide what we actually want here. With tripleo, we went through the stages of heat-admin and tripleo-admin. I guess we want to standardise on something similar here? But probably not root right?
Understand the install_yamls situation. Just saying that we probably want to aim for a non-root user before we GA.
| managementNetwork: ctlplane | ||
| ansible: | ||
| ansibleUser: cloud-admin | ||
| ansibleUser: root | ||
| ansiblePort: 22 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is the default. should we drop it?
| managementNetwork: ctlplane | ||
| ansible: | ||
| ansibleUser: cloud-admin | ||
| ansibleUser: root | ||
| ansiblePort: 22 | ||
| ansibleVars: | ||
| service_net_map: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not used anywhere. can be dropped.
| @@ -87,32 +50,11 @@ spec: | |||
| # Default nic config template for a EDPM compute node | |||
| # These vars are edpm_network_config role vars | |||
| edpm_network_config_hide_sensitive_logs: false | |||
| edpm_network_config_template: templates/single_nic_vlans/single_nic_vlans.j2 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is the default. drop it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now that we have merged the new CRD design, I'll keep pushing forward with my other PR to change how this interface works anyway.
#394
| managementNetwork: ctlplane | ||
| ansible: | ||
| ansibleUser: cloud-admin | ||
| ansibleUser: root |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably decide what we actually want here. With tripleo, we went through the stages of heat-admin and tripleo-admin. I guess we want to standardise on something similar here? But probably not root right?
Understand the install_yamls situation. Just saying that we probably want to aim for a non-root user before we GA.
| @@ -87,32 +50,11 @@ spec: | |||
| # Default nic config template for a EDPM compute node | |||
| # These vars are edpm_network_config role vars | |||
| edpm_network_config_hide_sensitive_logs: false | |||
| edpm_network_config_template: templates/single_nic_vlans/single_nic_vlans.j2 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now that we have merged the new CRD design, I'll keep pushing forward with my other PR to change how this interface works anyway.
#394
| edpm_ovn_dbs: | ||
| - 192.168.111.1 | ||
| - 192.168.122.1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I had issues with 192.168.122.0/24 which is why I ended up on 192.168.111.0/24 I notice the rdo checks haven't run for this change so we might not be seeing the issue with addressing. Provided this actually works in CI and doesn't require some other change, I have no other preference to any particular subnet. Just calling it out in-case there's more required for this subnet change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is another thing that is different when baremetal or not: 9b19caf
fao89
force-pushed
the
upsamples
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9d8e8df to
3c53bd9
Compare
|
Build failed (check pipeline). Post https://review.rdoproject.org/zuul/buildset/2dbd0b61aad94b6992e632a4d35fe8d8 ✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 1h 46m 41s |
- remove the symlinks - update IPAM sample Signed-off-by: Fabricio Aguiar <[email protected]>
|
/lgtm |
