Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

openstack: No neutron dns #1294

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Mar 1, 2019

Conversation

flaper87
Copy link
Contributor

@flaper87 flaper87 commented Feb 22, 2019

We've stopped depending on neutron DNS being configured and instead we're fully relying on the CoreDNS instance running on the service VM. This allows us to support more OpenStack clouds, without changing our architecture.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Feb 22, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 23, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 25, 2019
@flaper87 flaper87 force-pushed the no-neutron-dns branch 5 times, most recently from b9fa4a9 to 82d38f9 Compare February 27, 2019 10:56
@flaper87 flaper87 changed the title wip: openstack: No neutron dns openstack: No neutron dns Feb 28, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Feb 28, 2019
@flaper87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 28, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 28, 2019
@trown
Copy link

trown commented Feb 28, 2019

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 28, 2019
russellb and others added 6 commits February 28, 2019 16:15
Technically, network names in OpenStack are not unique.  We would
expect almost every deployment to be using a unique name for its
external network, though.

In the rare case where you must disambiguate networks, it's possible
to specify the UUID via a terraform variable.

$ env TF_VAR_openstack_external_network_id="6a32627e-d98d-40d8-9324-5da7cf1452fc" \
> bin/openshift-install create cluster
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 28, 2019
@trown
Copy link

trown commented Feb 28, 2019

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 28, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: flaper87, trown

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@flaper87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aws

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 7456cf2 into openshift:master Mar 1, 2019
wking added a commit to wking/openshift-installer that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2019
I've left 8d0847c (openstack: Support setting network UUID via
terraform variable, 2018-12-05, openshift#794) undocumented, since it seems
like an unstable-enough user-facing API approach that I don't think we
want to noise it about and deal with the fall-out when we change the
API ;).  That commit also made it into this history via 44a9cd3
(openshift#1294).

https://github.com/openshift/cluster-version-operator/blob/master/Dockerfile#L8
wking added a commit to wking/openshift-installer that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2019
Through c8b3b55 (Merge pull request openshift#1338 from
flaper87/sec-groups-update, 2019-05-01).

I've left 8d0847c (openstack: Support setting network UUID via
terraform variable, 2018-12-05, openshift#794) undocumented, since it seems
like an unstable-enough user-facing API approach that I don't think we
want to noise it about and deal with the fall-out when we change the
API ;).  That commit also made it into this history via 44a9cd3
(openshift#1294).

https://github.com/openshift/cluster-version-operator/blob/master/Dockerfile#L8
wking added a commit to wking/openshift-installer that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2019
Through c8b3b55 (Merge pull request openshift#1338 from
flaper87/sec-groups-update, 2019-05-01).

I've left 8d0847c (openstack: Support setting network UUID via
terraform variable, 2018-12-05, openshift#794) undocumented, since it seems
like an unstable-enough user-facing API approach that I don't think we
want to noise it about and deal with the fall-out when we change the
API ;).  That commit also made it into this history via 44a9cd3
(openshift#1294).

I've also left off eecf496 (openstack: remove neutron dns,
2019-02-19, openshift#1294), because I have no idea what that's about ;).  I'll
fill in an entry for it later once one of the OpenStack devs explains
it to me :p.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants