Bug 1583230

Summary:	[BACKPORT] [RHOSP10] Backport fix for configuring ntp servers in undercloud
Product:	Red Hat OpenStack	Reporter:	Bertrand <brault>
Component:	instack-undercloud	Assignee:	Alex Schultz <aschultz>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Arik Chernetsky <achernet>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	10.0 (Newton)	CC:	aschultz, brault, dcadzow, mburns, yroblamo
Target Milestone:	z9	Keywords:	Bugfix, FeatureBackport, Triaged, ZStream
Target Release:	10.0 (Newton)
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	instack-undercloud-5.3.7-2.el7ost	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2018-09-17 16:54:55 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Bertrand 2018-05-28 13:58:33 UTC

In RHOSP10 it is not possible to configure NTP Servers for undercloud.

This has been addressed in Ocata and beyond. [1],[2]

The request is to have this backported in RHOSP10, aka provide support for:
# List of ntp servers to use. (list value)
#undercloud_ntp_servers =

in undercloud.conf.

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/433623/
[2] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1664537

Comment 1 Alex Schultz 2018-05-29 11:57:09 UTC

Technically you can configure it via the hieradata override file. You would specify the following on the hieradata override file:

ntp::server:
  - host1
  - host2

Comment 11 Alex McLeod 2018-09-03 07:59:55 UTC

Hi there,

If this bug requires doc text for errata release, please set the 'Doc Type' and provide draft text according to the template in the 'Doc Text' field.

The documentation team will review, edit, and approve the text.

If this bug does not require doc text, please set the 'requires_doc_text' flag to -.

Thanks,
Alex

Comment 13 errata-xmlrpc 2018-09-17 16:54:55 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2018:2670