external: enable the use of only v2 mon port

[parth-gr]

currently the script requires to have both v2 and v1 port to enable v2 port, but that is not the necessary condition, so removing the chek, and enabling it only v2 is present to successfully configure with v2 only

part-of: #13827

Checklist:

• Commit Message Formatting: Commit titles and messages follow guidelines in the developer guide.
• Reviewed the developer guide on Submitting a Pull Request
• Pending release notes updated with breaking and/or notable changes for the next minor release.
• Documentation has been updated, if necessary.
• Unit tests have been added, if necessary.
• Integration tests have been added, if necessary.

[subhamkrai]

I'm sure v2 port doesnt' require v1 port but is there any doc or something to confirm this?

[bauerjs1]

@subhamkrai I am not sure if this is what you're looking for but this section suggests that it should be possible. With encryption or compression enabled, it is actually a requirement for external clusters to work with v2 only.

[parth-gr]

@subhamkrai but i think thats a nice point, and i can update that with a new flag if someone wants to use the encryption and can also document that

[travisn]

Looks good to remove this requirement, no need for the v1 port to be enabled.

[bauerjs1]

The script isn't failing anymore, however, I am still getting an error/warning:

'v2' address type not present, and 'v2-port-enable' flag is provided

After a lot of digging, it seems to me like this check does not make sense, because it assumes that a MON with only a single entry in the addrvec (from ceph quorum_status) has only v1 port enabled. However, in reality it can also have only v2 enabled.

[parth-gr]

The script isn't failing anymore, however, I am still getting an error/warning:

'v2' address type not present, and 'v2-port-enable' flag is provided

After a lot of digging, it seems to me like this check does not make sense, because it assumes that a MON with only a single entry in the addrvec (from ceph quorum_status) has only v1 port enabled. However, in reality it can also have only v2 enabled.

But it make sense if we have both the entries

[bauerjs1]

True! I correct myself: The mentioned check doesn't make sense in case there is only a v2 port. However, that is one of the possible cases that need to be handeled here.

The assumption behind this conditional (if I understand the code correctly) is "if there is only one port, then it's v1" but that is not always true.

[travisn]

Agreed, the v2 port could be the only one specified. @parth-gr Could you fix that check so that it doesn't require two endpoints in the list? The v2 port might be the only port.

[parth-gr]

Sure it make sense added a PR #13982