Hi, Currently both the undercloud (stackrc) and overcloud (overcloudrc) credential files make the user use environment variables for all the appropriate options. The limitations of environment variables is well understood, and when switching between the two can sometimes not be 100% clean (if you have options in 1 file but not the other, as environment variables aren't "unset"). The correct and future proof way of doing this is to use os-client-config and have TripleO correctly populate /home/stack/.config/openstack/clouds.yaml with the details of the two clouds (as they are created). An example copy of this file might look like clouds: undercloud: auth: auth_url: http://192.0.2.1:35357/ username: admin password: somepassword project_name: admin overcloud: auth: auth_url: https://cloud.example.com:13357/ username: admin password: anotherpassword project_name: admin Then a user has the option of using the command line tools against either cloud easily with openstack --os-cloud undercloud server list openstack --os-cloud overcloud server list or export OS_CLOUD=undercloud openstack server list export OS_CLOUD=overcloud openstack server list For backwards compatibility stackrc and overcloudrc files will remain but only export OS_CLOUD to the appropriate value. This better aligns with the direction python-openstackclient wishes us to go, is more robust than environment variables and allows the operator greater customisation, as the operator can add extra options (like forcing api versions etc) in clouds.yaml themselves (which we will not overwrite). On top of this, for users of tools such as python-shade and ansible (and other tools leveraging python-openstackclient programatically), this integration is a lot cleaner. An intermediate step could be to generate both files (clouds.yaml and the old files) Upstream blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tripleo/+spec/os-client-config-switch
This RFE is a bit wider than just the client work and also touches on tripleo-common, os-apply-config and tripleo-heat-templates at least. Unfortunately no one in the UI DFG has that breadth of knowledge at the moment, it would probably better for someone else to own this (DF?).
Unassigning myself as I am not working on this... Comments on the upstream blueprint indicate this was implemented in Train/OSP16.
We're currently generating a clouds yaml and rc files, as such we're closing this RFE. If there is a specific ask using our supported releases please reopen this RFE or create a new one.