Bug 1796929: baremetal: make provisioning networks more configurable

[stbenjam]

This change adds 4 new options to the baremetal platform:

• ProvisioningNetworkInterface
• ProvisioningNetworkCIDR
• ProvisioningDHCPExternal
• ProvisioningDHCPRange

This makes the provisioning network more configurable, by allowing users
to specify a specific network interface, which network, and settings for
whether the cluster should provide DHCP services on the provisioning
network, or if it will be managed externally. If we will provide DHCP
services on the network, the user may further customize which range to
use.

This change is a prerequisite to a number of additional high-priority
work items for the baremetal IPI platform, including single-stack IPv6
provisioning, external DHCP support, and end-to-end seamless deployment
without a manually created config map.

fixes #2091, among other issues.

Co-authored-by: Ian Main imain@redhat.com
Co-authored-by: Stephen Benjamin stephen@redhat.com

[stbenjam]

/cc @hardys @imain @sadasu

Since we're going with another approach for the CRD again, and openshift/api#540 won't be the solution, I'm breaking out the platform config changes separately so we can make progress on the other blocked tasks and deal with this asynchronously.

Once this lands and we have a CR somewhere, we can wire these values up with that.

[stbenjam]

/label platform/baremetal

[sadasu]

/test e2e-aws-upgrade

[metal3ci]

Build SUCCESS, see build http://10.8.144.11:8080/job/dev-tools/1410/

[metal3ci]

Build FAILURE, see build http://10.8.144.11:8080/job/dev-tools/1411/

[metal3ci]

Build FAILURE, see build http://10.8.144.11:8080/job/dev-tools/1412/

[metal3ci]

Build SUCCESS, see build http://10.8.144.11:8080/job/dev-tools/1413/

[stbenjam]

/retest

[stbenjam]

/test e2e-libvirt

[wking]

Seems like metal docs on the install-config schema are here? Install-config settings aren't UPI-specific though, so I'd like to see metal with a customization.md (like this) to talk about the settings. Those metal docs would be linked from the platform-agnostic docs, e.g. here and here. But wherever metal-specific install-config docs are living, those docs should be bumped by this PR to keep up with the install-config type changes you're making.

[stbenjam]

Seems like metal docs on the install-config schema are here? Install-config settings aren't UPI-specific though, so I'd like to see metal with a customization.md (like this) to talk about the settings. Those metal docs would be linked from the platform-agnostic docs, e.g. here and here. But wherever metal-specific install-config docs are living, those docs should be bumped by this PR to keep up with the install-config type changes you're making.

This PR includes documentation changes to discuss the new settings: https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/2895/files#diff-4fb874a2f3b6c60cebac5ba179481f94

I am happy to create a customization.md, would you like that included here? So far, we've mostly kept things in the install_ipi.md documents, as this is evolving. I wasn't sure we wanted to advertise the existence of the platform in other places in the installer docs until it's really something generally consumable.

There's a lot of work going on in https://github.com/openshift-kni/baremetal-deploy to write much more comprehensive docs, eventually those will be included here.

[wking]

This PR includes documentation changes to discuss the new settings: https://github.com/openshift/installer/pull/2895/files#diff-4fb874a2f3b6c60cebac5ba179481f94

But that's up before the install-config section down on line R96? I guess the property docs are spread out and that install-config section is not exhaustive?

[stbenjam]

This PR includes documentation changes to discuss the new settings: openshift/installer/pull/2895/files#diff-4fb874a2f3b6c60cebac5ba179481f94

But that's up before the install-config section down on line R96? I guess the property docs are spread out and that install-config section is not exhaustive?

We've had complaints in previous PR's when the install-config section had non-mandatory options, so I just enumerated them in the networking section, but it does seem like we need a customization.md. Can we handle that in a separate PR? I believe the baremetal docs in general do need a lot of work.

I opened #2931 as a rough draft.

[hardys]

/lgtm

[hardys]

/lgtm

[metal3ci]

Build FAILURE, see build http://10.8.144.11:8080/job/dev-tools/1427/

[sdodson]

All feedback appears to have been addressed and changes are isolated to baremetal templates now.
/approve

[openshift-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sdodson

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:

• OWNERS [sdodson]

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

[openshift-bot]

/retest

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

[openshift-ci-robot]

@stbenjam: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-openstack	c6db602	link	/test e2e-openstack
ci/prow/e2e-libvirt	c6db602	link	/test e2e-libvirt
ci/prow/e2e-aws-fips	c6db602	link	/test e2e-aws-fips
ci/prow/e2e-ovirt	c6db602	link	/test e2e-ovirt
ci/prow/e2e-aws-scaleup-rhel7	c6db602	link	/test e2e-aws-scaleup-rhel7

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@stbenjam: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged. Bugzilla bug 1796929 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1796929: baremetal: make provisioning networks more configurable

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[stbenjam]

/cherry-pick release-4.3

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

@stbenjam: #2895 failed to apply on top of branch "release-4.3":

error: Failed to merge in the changes.
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M	docs/user/metal/install_ipi.md
M	pkg/asset/ignition/bootstrap/bootstrap.go
M	pkg/types/baremetal/validation/platform.go
M	pkg/types/baremetal/validation/platform_test.go
M	pkg/types/validation/installconfig_test.go
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging pkg/types/validation/installconfig_test.go
Auto-merging pkg/types/baremetal/validation/platform_test.go
Auto-merging pkg/types/baremetal/validation/platform.go
Auto-merging pkg/asset/ignition/bootstrap/bootstrap.go
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in pkg/asset/ignition/bootstrap/bootstrap.go
Auto-merging docs/user/metal/install_ipi.md
Patch failed at 0001 baremetal: make provisioning networks more configurable

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.3

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.