Description of problem: HE deploy setup should use the configured nic as a default option for ovirtmgmt bridge. Right now it shows first on the list. However, since all the other default options in the setup are reasonable, the user tends to choose the suggested default option here as well and the setup fails. Since there is only 1 configured nic available on the host at a time of HE deployment, the setup should suggest it as the default option. Example: ~~~ Please indicate a nic to set ovirtmgmt bridge on: (enp0s26u1u2u5, eno1, eno2) [enp0s26u1u2u5]: eno1 ~~~ Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 3.6 RHEV-H HE deployment How reproducible: 100% on my machine. It seems like it might be an easy fix that may prevent many failed setup and frustration and customer cases, of course.
To me this looks like something which he-setup in general would benefit from.
Does node zero deployment affect this?
Moving needinfo to Simone
On node-zero we are filtering on interfaces with an IPv4 address.
(In reply to Simone Tiraboschi from comment #4) > On node-zero we are filtering on interfaces with an IPv4 address. So it's not solved?
If only one interface is configured with an IPv4 address we are fine, if we have more than one interface with IPv4 address we are presenting the list without any special ordering criteria.
(In reply to Simone Tiraboschi from comment #6) > If only one interface is configured with an IPv4 address we are fine, if we > have more than one interface with IPv4 address we are presenting the list > without any special ordering criteria. QE please test this.
Tested on latest components as follows: cockpit-ovirt-dashboard-0.11.20-1.el7ev.noarch rhvm-appliance-4.2-20180404.0.el7.noarch ovirt-hosted-engine-setup-2.2.16-1.el7ev.noarch ovirt-hosted-engine-ha-2.2.10-1.el7ev.noarch Linux 3.10.0-862.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Mar 21 18:14:51 EDT 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.5 (Maipo) I see configured NIC as default option as expected.
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-2018:1471
BZ<2>Jira Resync