Bug 909133

Summary:	Semantic validation: FA: guarded parameters for fence devices and fence instances
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6	Reporter:	Jan Pokorný [poki] <jpokorny>
Component:	luci	Assignee:	Ryan McCabe <rmccabe>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	cluster-qe <cluster-qe>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	6.5	CC:	cfeist, cluster-maint, fdinitto, mgrac, tlavigne
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	FutureFeature
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Enhancement
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:	906016	Environment:
Last Closed:	2015-10-21 22:44:59 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:	906016
Bug Blocks:	906324, 907470

Description Jan Pokorný [poki] 2013-02-08 11:41:01 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #906016 +++

Currently, luci is too liberate in terms of what configuration can be
achieved using it.

This bugs is to closely examine the semantically correct parameters
that can be used in conjuction with particular fence agents either
in the form of fence devices defined or respective per-node instances.

Note that partially, this is already captured in cluster.rng
(or obtainable from the same source as fence-agent related parts of
cluster.rng are generated), however:

1/ I am not sure about clear distinction of categories arising
   from a 2D matrix with axis can-be-at-device and can-be-at-instance

2/ with pure cluster.rng, we cannot prevent from fence_brocade instance
   having a "delay" attribute (see [bug 815666 comment 15]).


When the exact situation is mapped, the result of this RFE will be
less space for semantically incorrect configuration as the correct
attributes and either fence devices and instances will be enforced.

Comment 1 Jan Pokorný [poki] 2013-02-08 11:42:07 UTC

re: 2/ fence_brocade case was apparently a mere example

Comment 3 RHEL Program Management 2013-02-12 06:47:29 UTC

This request was not resolved in time for the current release.
Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if still desired, for consideration in
the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.