Bug 1930067

Summary:	Remove mentions about port 9283 to be used as monitoring-endpoint for external mode in OCS 4.7 docs
Product:	[Red Hat Storage] Red Hat OpenShift Container Storage	Reporter:	Rachael <rgeorge>
Component:	documentation	Assignee:	Disha Walvekar <dwalveka>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Rachael <rgeorge>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	4.7	CC:	asriram, dwalveka, nberry, ocs-bugs, sagrawal, shan
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	OCS 4.7.0
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2022-03-02 07:11:51 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:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1921782

Description Rachael 2021-02-18 10:02:33 UTC

Describe the issue:

With the fix for this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1902192, from OCS 4.7, for external mode, port 9283 will not be the only supported monitoring-endpoint port. All mentions of the same needs to be removed from the OCS 4.7 documentation.

- https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openshift_container_storage/4.6/html-single/deploying_openshift_container_storage_in_external_mode/index#creating-an-openshift-container-storage-cluster-service-for-external-storage_rhocs
    - Pre-requisites
    - Procedure, step 6.ii

- https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openshift_container_storage/4.6/html/updating_openshift_container_storage/updating-openshift-container-storage-in-external-mode_rhocs#enabling-monitoring-for-the-object-service-dashboard_rhocs
    - Pre-requisites
    - Procedure, step 3   


Product Version: OCS 4.7

Environment Details: OCS external mode

Any other versions of this document that also needs this update: No

Comment 8 Sébastien Han 2021-03-29 14:07:02 UTC

We can have a generic case like 2. and then in an advanced one like 1. Also, I'd be nice to have a table that have all the arguments of the script and explain each of them. That could suffice.