Bug 1566203 - [RFE] Spineleaf: Assigning ports to physical networks should occur automatically on undercloud.
Summary: [RFE] Spineleaf: Assigning ports to physical networks should occur automatica...
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat OpenStack
Classification: Red Hat
Component: openstack-tripleo-common
Version: 13.0 (Queens)
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: RHOS Maint
QA Contact: Alexander Chuzhoy
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2018-04-11 18:44 UTC by Alexander Chuzhoy
Modified: 2020-04-05 10:02 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Alexander Chuzhoy 2018-04-11 18:44:14 UTC
Currently deploying with multiple provisioning networks requires manually assigning ports to the respective leaf. It's done with:


Find out which baremetal ports are associated with which baremetal node. 
1. openstack baremetal node show <node-uuid>
2. openstack baremetal port show <port-uuid>
3. Set the node to maintenance mode
4. Then set the ``physical-network`` for the ports like below:
    openstack baremetal port set --physical-network <leaf> <port-uuid>

Would be nice if the above happens automatically based on the IP found on introspected nodes and the leaf range it was assigned from.

Comment 1 Harald Jensås 2018-04-16 12:02:45 UTC
In the Undercloud we currently always have a neutron provisioning network/subnet that we could use to resolve the physical_network based on the IP recieved during introspection. However -- Ironic and Ironic Inspector does not need to be configured this way. We may use a completely separate ip-subnet for introspection, and we may even run introspection on a different interface, e.g different physical_network. I can't see a sound way to implement this generically in Ironic Inspector in a way that would work for the diverse configurations.

I am not sure it is the best thing to go with the assumptions of Undercloud Ironic/Inspector configuration as it is today, and implement this in tripleo. What if we want to change Undercloud to allow more flexibility in the future? I am worried that this feature could complicate that, and we may end up with inconsistency where in some configurations the physical_network is automatically set, while in others it is not set.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.