Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 1362289

Summary: [DOCS] Ansible Upgrade Scripts don't account for DNS changes.
Product: OpenShift Container Platform Reporter: Eric Rich <erich>
Component: DocumentationAssignee: Alex Dellapenta <adellape>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Eric Rich <erich>
Severity: high Docs Contact: Vikram Goyal <vigoyal>
Priority: high    
Version: 3.2.1CC: adellape, anli, aos-bugs, jokerman, mmccomas, rhowe, sdodson, xtian
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 1362290 1372452 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-09-01 18:39:00 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: 1362290, 1372452    

Description Eric Rich 2016-08-01 20:13:40 UTC
Description of problem:

The following docs don't cover how to move existing nodes to the new prefered DNS configuration

https://docs.openshift.com/enterprise/3.2/install_config/upgrading/manual_upgrades.html
https://docs.openshift.com/enterprise/3.2/install_config/upgrading/automated_upgrades.html

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 3.2 -> 3.2 


Additional info:

Comment 2 Alex Dellapenta 2016-08-01 20:25:58 UTC
(In reply to Eric Rich from comment #0)
> Description of problem:

> Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 3.2 -> 3.2 

^ Think this is a typo of "3.1 -> 3.2".

Scott, do you know whether this playbook is appropriate (and has been QE'd) for running on 3.1 -> 3.2 upgraded hosts? Or would it need a separate upgrade playbook?

Comment 3 Scott Dodson 2016-08-02 01:32:38 UTC
That playbook should work, we'd need QE to validate it as that wasn't part of the original work. What's the best way to ask them to test something that's already done? A new card for that specific functionality?

Comment 4 Xiaoli Tian 2016-08-02 06:17:27 UTC
(In reply to Scott Dodson from comment #3)
> That playbook should work, we'd need QE to validate it as that wasn't part
> of the original work. What's the best way to ask them to test something
> that's already done? A new card for that specific functionality?

Usually it's a new card, you can describe the detail in the card and move it complete if it's just waiting for QE to test. 

Or bug is also fine for QE.

Comment 10 Alex Dellapenta 2016-08-19 21:47:30 UTC
PR for explaining that the DNS changes for 3.2 only happen for new installs (and not upgrades):

https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/2693

Comment 11 openshift-github-bot 2016-08-22 20:50:39 UTC
Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs

https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/commit/9629b304305a439f3f1dbb42eb120bdf702e4988
Merge pull request #2693 from adellape/dnsmasq_edit

Bug 1362289: Note re DNS changes for 3.2 upgrades

Comment 12 Alex Dellapenta 2016-08-22 21:09:54 UTC
Changes from https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/2693 are RELEASE_PENDING, but I'm leaving this BZ open until we can document the manual and/or automated steps for applying the 3.2 DNS changes to a cluster that was upgraded from 3.1.

Comment 13 Alex Dellapenta 2016-09-01 18:39:00 UTC
Cloned this BZ to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372452 to complete the remaining steps. Closing this BZ.

See revhistory here for the changes that were published from this BZ:

https://docs.openshift.com/enterprise/latest/welcome/revhistory_full.html#tue-aug-23-2016