moving specs directory from openstack-attic/akanda
Co-authored by: Sean Roberts <seanroberts66@gmail.com> Co-authored by: Adam Gandelman <adamg@ubuntu.com> Change-Id: I7fcf0af9753efd747a8bc96f00a90f2487d1a948
This commit is contained in:
David Lenwell
parent
f2a02ad887
commit
d162f3789f
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
|
|||
OpenStack Akanda Specifications
|
||||
===============================
|
||||
|
||||
This directory structure is used to hold approved design specifications for additions
|
||||
to the Akanda project. Reviews of the specs are done in gerrit, using a
|
||||
similar workflow to how we review and merge changes to the code itself.
|
||||
|
||||
The layout of this repository is::
|
||||
|
||||
specs/<release>/
|
||||
|
||||
You can find an example spec in `specs/template.rst`. A
|
||||
skeleton that contains all the sections required for a spec
|
||||
file is located in `specs/skeleton.rst` and can
|
||||
be copied, then filled in with the details of a new blueprint for
|
||||
convenience.
|
||||
|
||||
Specifications are proposed for a given release by adding them to the
|
||||
`specs/<release>` directory and posting it for review. The implementation
|
||||
status of a blueprint for a given release can be found by looking at the
|
||||
blueprint in launchpad. Not all approved blueprints will get fully implemented.
|
||||
|
||||
Specifications have to be re-proposed for every release. The review may be
|
||||
quick, but even if something was previously approved, it should be re-reviewed
|
||||
to make sure it still makes sense as written.
|
||||
|
||||
Please note, Launchpad blueprints are still used for tracking the
|
||||
current status of blueprints. For more information, see::
|
||||
|
||||
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints
|
||||
http://blueprints.launchpad.net/akanda
|
||||
|
||||
For more information about working with gerrit, see::
|
||||
|
||||
http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#development-workflow
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Title of your blueprint
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
|
||||
Akanda CI updates for Kilo
|
||||
|
||||
Problem Description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
We build lots of interconnected things but dont test any of the things. We
|
||||
should be employing pre-commit testing similar to other projects to ensure
|
||||
users get something thats not broken when deploying from master of git
|
||||
repositories or generated tarballs and images.
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed Change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
All changes to Akanda projects should go through regular check and gate
|
||||
phases that test a deployment containing proposed code changes. This
|
||||
includes changes to Akanda code as well as supporting things like its devstack
|
||||
code and ``akanda-appliance-builder``. We can leverage devstack, tempest
|
||||
and diskimage-builder to do this and create a generic Akanda integration
|
||||
testing job that can be added to the pipelines of relevant projects. We should
|
||||
also be running standard unit test coverage and pep8 checks here, too.
|
||||
|
||||
For code that runs in the Akanda appliance VM or code that is used to build
|
||||
said image, we should ensure that tests run against proposed changes and not
|
||||
static, pre-built appliance images. That is, runs that are testing changes
|
||||
to ``akanda-appliance`` should build and entirely new appliance VM image and
|
||||
use that for its integration tests instead of pulling a pre-built image that
|
||||
does not contain the code under review.
|
||||
|
||||
Additionally, we should be archiving the results of changes to these
|
||||
appliance-related repositories as a 'latest' image. That is, if someone
|
||||
lands a change to ``akanda-appliance``, we should build and archive a
|
||||
VM image in a known location on the internet. This will speed up other
|
||||
tests that do not need to build a new image but should run against the
|
||||
latest version, and also avoid forcing users to needlessly build images.
|
||||
|
||||
For changes that do not modify the appliance code or tooling used to build
|
||||
the image, tests should run with a pre-built image. This can be either a
|
||||
'latest' image or a released, versioned image.
|
||||
|
||||
One question at this point is where we run the Tempest jobs. These usually
|
||||
take between 30min-1hr to complete and the nodes that run them in the main
|
||||
OpenStack gate are a limited resource. We may need to maintain our own third
|
||||
party CI infrastructure to do this. TBD.
|
||||
|
||||
Data Model Impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
REST API Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Security Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Notifications Impact
|
||||
--------------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Other End User Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Other Deployer Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
Developers hoping to land code in any of the Akanda repositories will need to
|
||||
ensure their code passes all gate tests before it can land.
|
||||
|
||||
Community Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
This may make landing changes a bit slower but should improve the overall
|
||||
quality and health of Akanda repositories.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
* Enable pep8 and unit test jobs against relevant Akanda repositories.
|
||||
|
||||
* Move existing devstack code to out of ``http://github.com/dreamhost/akanda-devstack.git``
|
||||
and into a proper gerrit-managed Akanda repository in the stackforge namespace.
|
||||
|
||||
* Complete diskimage-builder support that currently exists in
|
||||
``http://github.com/stackforge/akanda-appliance-builder.git``
|
||||
|
||||
* Update devstack code to either pull a pre-built Akanda appliance image from a
|
||||
known URL or to build one from source for use in test run.
|
||||
|
||||
* Create a generic ``(check|gate)-dsvm-tempest-akanda`` job that spins up the
|
||||
Akanda devstack deployment and runs a subset of Tempest tests against it.
|
||||
|
||||
* Identifiy the subset of Tempest tests we care to run.
|
||||
|
||||
* Sync with openstack-infra and determine how and where these integration test
|
||||
jobs will run.
|
||||
|
||||
* Run the devstack job against changes to ``akanda-appliance`` or
|
||||
``akanda-appliace-builder`` with a configuration such that the appliance
|
||||
image will be built from source including the patch under review.
|
||||
|
||||
* Setup infrastructure to publish a new appliance image
|
||||
(ie, akanda-appliance-latest.qcow2) to a known location on the internet
|
||||
after code lands in ``akanda-appliance`` or ``akanda-appliance-builder``
|
||||
|
||||
* Run the devstack job against all other relevant akanda repositories with a
|
||||
configuration such that a pre-built appliance image from a known location on
|
||||
the internet. Ideally, this will be the image produced from changes to
|
||||
the appliance repositories (ie, akanda-appliance-latest.qcow2)
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Tempest Tests
|
||||
-------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
Functional Tests
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
API Tests
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
Documentation Impact
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
User Documentation
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Should be updated to reflect the new home of devstack code and proper ways to
|
||||
deploy it.
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Documentation
|
||||
-----------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Should be updated to reflect the new home of devstack code and proper ways to
|
||||
deploy it.
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
|||
../skeleton.rst
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,192 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Title of your blueprint
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
|
||||
Liberty release documentation updates
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Problem Description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
The documentation needs to be easy for new users and contributors while
|
||||
following similar OpenStack docs structure and conventions.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed Change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
Organize the documentation around four sections: What Is Akanda, Installing
|
||||
Akanda, Operating Akanda, and Akanda Developer Guide.
|
||||
|
||||
This change will make the Akanda documentation [1] read similar to the existing
|
||||
OpenStack documentation [2]. This will also prepare the Akanda documentation
|
||||
for merging with the OpenStack documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
What Is Akanda section will hold the existing High Level Architecture,
|
||||
Service VM Orchestration and Management, The Service VM sections. These pages
|
||||
VM will be renamed to Instance. We will
|
||||
add user documentation for demonstrating akanda, understanding how it
|
||||
orchestrates network services, and how to compare (or not to) akanda to other
|
||||
SDN options. Add some details around EW and NS frame/packet flow between
|
||||
compute nodes. Make IPv6 support very clear and called out. Explain the driver
|
||||
concept and how it will make support of new Neutron Advanced services easier.
|
||||
Additionally provide understanding of how Akanda integrates with Neutron. Say
|
||||
all this without duplicating any of the existing OpenStack documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
Installing Akanda section will hold the existing Akanda Developer Quickstart.
|
||||
Adding installing from tarballs, source, and eventually distribution. Known good
|
||||
configurations will also be part of this section.
|
||||
|
||||
Operating Akanda will hold the existing Operation and Deployment and
|
||||
Configuration Options. We will add the training material here. We will need to
|
||||
add details on dynamic routing support, how the configuration drift support
|
||||
works and is managed. Links to supporting ML2 drivers like linuxbridge and OVS.
|
||||
Making it clear how Akanda supports common Neutron configurations and
|
||||
configuration changes. Add details on supporting VXLAN overlay and Lightweight
|
||||
Network Virtualization (LNV) (Hierarchical Port Binding) with Akanda.
|
||||
|
||||
Akanda Developer Guide will hold the details on setting up the developer
|
||||
environment, testing code locally, explaining the CI tests, along with some
|
||||
references to Neutron dependencies. This entire section will move to the
|
||||
Akanda developer reference section here [3], once the Akanda project is
|
||||
accepted into the OpenStack org repo.
|
||||
|
||||
This spec also includes the use of docstrings in the code. We will start with
|
||||
updating the rug code with docstrings as the most critical.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Data Model Impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
REST API Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Security Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Notifications Impact
|
||||
--------------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Other End User Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Other Deployer Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
Updating the documentation structure will make it easier for new contributors
|
||||
to join the Akanda project. As Akanda joins the OpenStack org repo structure,
|
||||
it will make setting up the devref material very easy.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Community Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
The OpenStack community will better understand what the Akanda project is
|
||||
about and why it is important with clear documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
* Leave documentation as is
|
||||
* Wait until the Akanda project is moved into the OpenStack org repo before
|
||||
updating the documentation structure.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
Sean Roberts (sarob)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
* Create a patch to restructure the Akanda documentation
|
||||
* Add new content from slides and other sources
|
||||
* After Akanda gets moved into OpenStack org repos, move the Akanda developer
|
||||
reference to doc.openstack.org/developer/akanda/devref/
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Tempest Tests
|
||||
-------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Functional Tests
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
API Tests
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Documentation Impact
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
User Documentation
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
See the proposed change section
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Documentation
|
||||
-----------------------
|
||||
|
||||
See the proposed change section
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
[1] http://docs.akanda.io/
|
||||
[2] http://docs.openstack.org/
|
||||
[3] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/openstack-projects.html
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,201 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Title of your blueprint
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
|
||||
Rug HA and scaleout
|
||||
|
||||
Problem Description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
The RUG is a multi-process, multi-worker service but it be cannot be
|
||||
scaled out to multiple nodes for purposes of high-availability and
|
||||
distributed handling of load. The only currently option for a
|
||||
highly-available is to do an active/passive cluster using Pacemaker
|
||||
or similar, which is less than ideal and does not address scale-out
|
||||
concerns.
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed Change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
This proposes allowing multiple RUG processes to be spawned across
|
||||
many nodes. Each RUG process is responsible for a fraction of the
|
||||
total running appliances. RUG_process->appliance(s) mapping will be
|
||||
managed by a consistent hash ring. An external coordination service
|
||||
(ie, zookeeper) will be leveraged to provide cluster membership
|
||||
capabilities, and python-tooz will be used to manage cluster events.
|
||||
When new members join or depart, the hash ring will be rebalanced and
|
||||
appliances re-distributed across the RUG.
|
||||
|
||||
This allows operators to scale out to many RUG instances, eliminating
|
||||
the single-point-of-failure and allowing appliances to be evenly
|
||||
distributed across multiple worker processes.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Data Model Impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
REST API Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
Security Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Notifications Impact
|
||||
--------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Other End User Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
There will be some new overhead introduced the messaging layer as Neutron
|
||||
notifications and RPCs will need to be distributed to per-RUG message queues.
|
||||
|
||||
Other Deployer Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Deployers will need to evaluate and choose an appropriate backend to be used
|
||||
by tooz for leader election. memcached is a simple yet non-robust solution,
|
||||
while zookeeper is a less light-weight but proven one. More info at [2]
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
Community Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
n/a
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
One alternative to having each RUG instance declare its own messaging queue and
|
||||
inspect all incoming messages would be to have the DHT master also serve as a
|
||||
notification master. That is, the leader would be the only instance of the RUG
|
||||
listening to and processing incoming Neutron notificatons, and then
|
||||
re-distributing them to specific RUG workers based on the state of the DHT.
|
||||
|
||||
Another option would be to do away with the use of Neutron notifications
|
||||
entirely and hard-wire the akanda-neutron plugin to the RUG via a dedicated
|
||||
message queue.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
This proposes enabling operators to run multiple instances of the RUG.
|
||||
Each instance of the RUG will be responsible for a subset of the managed
|
||||
appliances. A distributed, consistent hash ring will be used to map appliances
|
||||
to their respective RUG instance. The Ironic project is already doing
|
||||
something similar and has a hashring implementation we can likely leverage
|
||||
to get started [1]
|
||||
|
||||
The RUG cluster is essentially leaderless. The hash ring is constructed
|
||||
using the active node list and each indvidual RUG instance is capable of
|
||||
constructing a ring given a list of members. This ring is consistent
|
||||
across nodes provided the coordination service is properly reporting membership
|
||||
events and they are processed correctly. Using metadata attached to incoming
|
||||
events (ie, tenant_id), a consumer is able to check the hash ring to determine
|
||||
which node in the ring the event is mapped to.
|
||||
|
||||
The RUG will spawn a new subprocess called the coordinator. It's only purpose
|
||||
is to listen for cluster membership events using python-tooz. When a member
|
||||
joins or departs, the coordinator will create a new Event of type REBALANCE
|
||||
and put it onto the notifications queue. This event's body will contain an
|
||||
updated list of current cluster nodes.
|
||||
|
||||
Each RUG worker process will maintain a copy of the hash ring, which is
|
||||
shared by its worker threads. When it receives a REBALANCE event, it will
|
||||
rebalance the hash ring given the new membership list. When it receives
|
||||
normal CRUD events for resources, it will first check the hash ring to see
|
||||
if it is mapped to its host based on target tenant_id for the event. If it is,
|
||||
the event will be processed. If it is not, the event will be ignored and
|
||||
serviced by another worker.
|
||||
|
||||
Ideally, REBALANCE events should be serviced before CRUD events.
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
* Implement a distributed hash ring for managing worker:appliance
|
||||
assignment
|
||||
|
||||
* Add new coordination sub-process to the RUG that publishes REBALANCE
|
||||
events to the notifications queue when membership changes
|
||||
|
||||
* Setup per-RUG message queues such that notifications are distributed to all
|
||||
RUG processes equally.
|
||||
|
||||
* Update worker to manage its own copy of the hash ring
|
||||
|
||||
* Update worker /w ability to respond to new REBALANCE events by rebalancing
|
||||
the ring with an updated membership list
|
||||
|
||||
* Update worker to drop events for resources that are not mapped to its host in
|
||||
the hash ring.
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Tempest Tests
|
||||
-------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Functional Tests
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
If we cannot sufficiently test this using unit tests, we could potentially
|
||||
spin up our devstack job with multiple copies of the akanda-rug-service
|
||||
running on a single host, and having multiple router appliances. This
|
||||
would allow us to test ring rebalancing by killing off one of the multiple
|
||||
akanda-rug-service processes.
|
||||
|
||||
API Tests
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Documentation Impact
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
User Documentation
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Deployment docs need to be updated to mention this feature is dependent
|
||||
on an external coordination service.
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Documentation
|
||||
-----------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
[1] https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/ironic/tree/ironic/common/hash_ring.py
|
||||
[2] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/tooz/drivers.html
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
|||
../skeleton.rst
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Title of your blueprint
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Problem Description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed Change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Data Model Impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
REST API Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Security Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Notifications Impact
|
||||
--------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Other End User Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Other Deployer Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Community Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Tempest Tests
|
||||
-------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Functional Tests
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
API Tests
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Documentation Impact
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
User Documentation
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Documentation
|
||||
-----------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,471 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
==========================================
|
||||
Example Spec - The title of your blueprint
|
||||
==========================================
|
||||
|
||||
Include the URL of your launchpad blueprint:
|
||||
|
||||
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/akanda/+spec/example
|
||||
|
||||
Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing anything? A single paragraph of
|
||||
prose that **operators, deployers, and developers** can understand.
|
||||
|
||||
If your specification proposes any changes to the Akanda REST API such
|
||||
as changing parameters which can be returned or accepted, or even
|
||||
the semantics of what happens when a client calls into the API, then
|
||||
you should add the APIImpact flag to the commit message. Specifications with
|
||||
the APIImpact flag can be found with the following query:
|
||||
|
||||
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/neutron-specs+message:apiimpact,n,z
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Problem Description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
A detailed description of the problem:
|
||||
|
||||
* For a new feature this should be use cases. Ensure you are clear about the
|
||||
actors in each use case: End User vs Deployer
|
||||
|
||||
* For a major reworking of something existing it would describe the
|
||||
problems in that feature that are being addressed.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed Change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
Here is where you cover the change you propose to make in detail. How do you
|
||||
propose to solve this problem?
|
||||
|
||||
If this is one part of a larger effort make it clear where this piece ends. In
|
||||
other words, what's the scope of this effort?
|
||||
|
||||
Data Model Impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
Changes which require modifications to the data model often have a wider impact
|
||||
on the system. The community often has strong opinions on how the data model
|
||||
should be evolved, from both a functional and performance perspective. It is
|
||||
therefore important to capture and gain agreement as early as possible on any
|
||||
proposed changes to the data model.
|
||||
|
||||
Questions which need to be addressed by this section include:
|
||||
|
||||
* What new data objects and/or database schema changes is this going to require?
|
||||
|
||||
* What database migrations will accompany this change.
|
||||
|
||||
* How will the initial set of new data objects be generated, for example if you
|
||||
need to take into account existing instances, or modify other existing data
|
||||
describe how that will work.
|
||||
|
||||
REST API Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
For each API resource to be implemented, describe the resource
|
||||
collection and specify the name, type, and other essential details of
|
||||
each new or modified attribute. A table similar to the following may
|
||||
be used:
|
||||
|
||||
+----------+-------+---------+---------+------------+--------------+
|
||||
|Attribute |Type |Access |Default |Validation/ |Description |
|
||||
|Name | | |Value |Conversion | |
|
||||
+==========+=======+=========+=========+============+==============+
|
||||
|id |string |RO, all |generated|N/A |identity |
|
||||
| |(UUID) | | | | |
|
||||
+----------+-------+---------+---------+------------+--------------+
|
||||
|name |string |RW, all |'' |string |human-readable|
|
||||
| | | | | |name |
|
||||
+----------+-------+---------+---------+------------+--------------+
|
||||
|color |string |RW, admin|'red' |'red', |color |
|
||||
| | | | |'yellow', or|indicating |
|
||||
| | | | |'green' |state |
|
||||
+----------+-------+---------+---------+------------+--------------+
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Here is the other example of the table using csv-table
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
.. csv-table:: CSVTable
|
||||
:header: Attribute Name,Type,Access,Default Value,Validation Conversion,Description
|
||||
|
||||
id,string (UUID),"RO, all",generated,N/A,identity
|
||||
name,string,"RW, all","''",string,human-readable name
|
||||
color,string,"RW, admin",red,"'red', 'yellow' or 'green'",color indicating state
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Each API method which is either added or changed should have the following:
|
||||
|
||||
* Specification for the method
|
||||
|
||||
* A description of what the method does suitable for use in
|
||||
user documentation
|
||||
|
||||
* Method type (POST/PUT/GET/DELETE)
|
||||
|
||||
* Normal http response code(s)
|
||||
|
||||
* Expected error http response code(s)
|
||||
|
||||
* A description for each possible error code should be included
|
||||
describing semantic errors which can cause it such as
|
||||
inconsistent parameters supplied to the method, or when an
|
||||
instance is not in an appropriate state for the request to
|
||||
succeed. Errors caused by syntactic problems covered by the JSON
|
||||
schema defintion do not need to be included.
|
||||
|
||||
* URL for the resource
|
||||
|
||||
* Parameters which can be passed via the url
|
||||
|
||||
* JSON schema definition for the body data if allowed
|
||||
|
||||
* JSON schema definition for the response data if any
|
||||
|
||||
* Example use case including typical API samples for both data supplied
|
||||
by the caller and the response
|
||||
|
||||
* Discuss any API policy changes, and discuss what things a deployer needs to
|
||||
think about when defining their API policy. This is in reference to the
|
||||
policy.json file.
|
||||
|
||||
Note that the schema should be defined as restrictively as
|
||||
possible. Parameters which are required should be marked as such and
|
||||
only under exceptional circumstances should additional parameters
|
||||
which are not defined in the schema be permitted (eg
|
||||
additionaProperties should be False).
|
||||
|
||||
Reuse of existing predefined parameter types such as regexps for
|
||||
passwords and user defined names is highly encouraged.
|
||||
|
||||
Security Impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
Describe any potential security impact on the system. Some of the items to
|
||||
consider include:
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change touch sensitive data such as tokens, keys, or user data?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change alter the API in a way that may impact security, such as
|
||||
a new way to access sensitive information or a new way to login?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change involve cryptography or hashing?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change require the use of sudo or any elevated privileges?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change involve using or parsing user-provided data? This could
|
||||
be directly at the API level or indirectly such as changes to a cache layer.
|
||||
|
||||
* Can this change enable a resource exhaustion attack, such as allowing a
|
||||
single API interaction to consume significant server resources? Some examples
|
||||
of this include launching subprocesses for each connection, or entity
|
||||
expansion attacks in XML.
|
||||
|
||||
For more detailed guidance, please see the OpenStack Security Guidelines
|
||||
[#security_guidelines]_ as a reference. These guidelines are a work in
|
||||
progress and are designed to help you identify security best practices.
|
||||
For further information, feel free to reach out to the OpenStack Security
|
||||
Group at openstack-security@lists.openstack.org.
|
||||
|
||||
.. [#security_guidelines] OpenStack Security Guidelines
|
||||
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Security/Guidelines
|
||||
|
||||
Notifications Impact
|
||||
--------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Please specify any changes to notifications. Be that an extra notification,
|
||||
changes to an existing notification, or removing a notification.
|
||||
|
||||
Other End User Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Aside from the API, are there other ways a user will interact with this feature?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Describe any potential performance impact on the system, for example
|
||||
how often will new code be called, and is there a major change to the calling
|
||||
pattern of existing code.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples of things to consider here include:
|
||||
|
||||
* A periodic task might look like a small addition but if it calls conductor or
|
||||
another service the load is multiplied by the number of nodes in the system.
|
||||
|
||||
* A small change in a utility function or a commonly used decorator can have a
|
||||
large impacts on performance.
|
||||
|
||||
* Calls which result in a database queries (whether direct or via conductor) can
|
||||
have a profound impact on performance when called in critical sections of the
|
||||
code.
|
||||
|
||||
* Will the change include any locking, and if so what considerations are there on
|
||||
holding the lock?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Other Deployer Impact
|
||||
---------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Discuss things that will affect how you deploy and configure OpenStack
|
||||
that have not already been mentioned, such as:
|
||||
|
||||
* What config options are being added? Should they be more generic than
|
||||
proposed (for example a flag that other hypervisor drivers might want to
|
||||
implement as well)? Are the default values ones which will work well in
|
||||
real deployments?
|
||||
|
||||
* Is this a change that takes immediate effect after its merged, or is it
|
||||
something that has to be explicitly enabled?
|
||||
|
||||
* If this change is a new binary, how would it be deployed?
|
||||
|
||||
* Please state anything that those doing continuous deployment, or those
|
||||
upgrading from the previous release, need to be aware of. Also describe
|
||||
any plans to deprecate configuration values or features. For example, if we
|
||||
change the directory name that instances are stored in, how do we handle
|
||||
instance directories created before the change landed? Do we move them? Do
|
||||
we have a special case in the code? Do we assume that the operator will
|
||||
recreate all the instances in their cloud?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this require downtime or manual intervention to apply when upgrading?
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
Discuss things that will affect other developers working on OpenStack,
|
||||
such as:
|
||||
|
||||
* If the blueprint proposes a change to the API, discussion of how other
|
||||
plugins would implement the feature is required.
|
||||
|
||||
Community Impact
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
Describe how this change fits in with the direction the Akanda community is
|
||||
going.
|
||||
|
||||
* Has the change been discussed on mailing lists, at the weekly Akanda
|
||||
meeting, or at a Design Summit?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does the change fit with the direction of the Akanda community?
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
What other ways could we do this thing? Why aren't we using those? This doesn't
|
||||
have to be a full literature review, but it should demonstrate that thought has
|
||||
been put into why the proposed solution is an appropriate one.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
Who is leading the writing of the code? Or is this a blueprint where you're
|
||||
throwing it out there to see who picks it up?
|
||||
|
||||
If more than one person is working on the implementation, please designate the
|
||||
primary author and contact.
|
||||
|
||||
Primary assignee:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Other contributors:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
Work items or tasks -- break the feature up into the things that need to be
|
||||
done to implement it. Those parts might end up being done by different people,
|
||||
but we're mostly trying to understand the timeline for implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
* Include specific references to specs and/or blueprints in Akanda, or in other
|
||||
projects, that this one either depends on or is related to.
|
||||
|
||||
* If this requires functionality of another project that is not currently used
|
||||
by Akanda (such as the glance v2 API when we previously only required v1),
|
||||
document that fact.
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this feature require any new library dependencies or code otherwise not
|
||||
included in OpenStack? Or does it depend on a specific version of library?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Please discuss how the change will be tested. We especially want to know what
|
||||
tempest tests will be added. It is assumed that unit test coverage will be
|
||||
added so that doesn't need to be mentioned explicitly, but discussion of why
|
||||
you think unit tests are sufficient and we don't need to add more tempest
|
||||
tests would need to be included.
|
||||
|
||||
Is this untestable in gate given current limitations (specific hardware /
|
||||
software configurations available)? If so, are there mitigation plans (3rd
|
||||
party testing, gate enhancements, etc).
|
||||
|
||||
Tempest Tests
|
||||
-------------
|
||||
|
||||
List new, changed, or deleted Tempest tests in this section. If a blueprint
|
||||
has been filed in the Tempest specs repository, please cross reference that
|
||||
blueprint here.
|
||||
|
||||
Functional Tests
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
Please document any functional tests which this change will require. New
|
||||
features will require functional tests before being allowed to be merged.
|
||||
Code refactors may require functional tests.
|
||||
|
||||
API Tests
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
Add changes to API tests in this section. This is required if the change is
|
||||
adding, removing, or changing any API related code in Akanda.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Documentation Impact
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
What is the impact on the docs team of this change? Some changes might require
|
||||
donating resources to the docs team to have the documentation updated. Don't
|
||||
repeat details discussed above, but please reference them here.
|
||||
|
||||
User Documentation
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Specify any User Documentation which needs to be changed. Reference the guides
|
||||
which need updating due to this change.
|
||||
|
||||
Developer Documentation
|
||||
-----------------------
|
||||
|
||||
If API changes are being made, specify the developer API documentation which
|
||||
will be updated to reflect the new changes here.
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Please add any useful references here. You are not required to have any
|
||||
reference. Moreover, this specification should still make sense when your
|
||||
references are unavailable. Examples of what you could include are:
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to mailing list or IRC discussions
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to notes from a summit session
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to relevant research, if appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
* Related specifications as appropriate (e.g. link any vendor documentation)
|
||||
|
||||
* Anything else you feel it is worthwhile to refer to
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
NOTE: Please remove everything from here and down. This section is meant to
|
||||
show examples of how to format the spec.
|
||||
|
||||
Some notes about using this template:
|
||||
|
||||
* Your spec should be in ReSTructured text, like this template.
|
||||
|
||||
* Please wrap text at 80 columns.
|
||||
|
||||
* The filename in the git repository should match the launchpad URL, for
|
||||
example a URL of: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/akanda/+spec/awesome-thing
|
||||
should be named awesome-thing.rst
|
||||
|
||||
* Please do not delete any of the sections in this template. If you have
|
||||
nothing to say for a whole section, just write: None
|
||||
|
||||
* For help with syntax, see http://sphinx-doc.org/rest.html
|
||||
|
||||
* To test out your formatting, build the docs using tox, or see:
|
||||
http://rst.ninjs.org
|
||||
|
||||
* If you would like to provide a diagram with your spec, text representations
|
||||
are preferred. http://asciiflow.com/ is a very nice tool to assist with
|
||||
making ascii diagrams. blockdiag is another tool. These are described below.
|
||||
If you require an image (screenshot) for your BP, attaching that to the BP
|
||||
and checking it in is also accepted. However, text representations are prefered.
|
||||
|
||||
* Diagram examples
|
||||
|
||||
asciiflow::
|
||||
|
||||
+----------+ +-----------+ +----------+
|
||||
| A | | B | | C |
|
||||
| +-----+ +--------+ |
|
||||
+----------+ +-----------+ +----------+
|
||||
|
||||
blockdiag
|
||||
|
||||
.. blockdiag::
|
||||
|
||||
blockdiag sample {
|
||||
a -> b -> c;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
actdiag
|
||||
|
||||
.. actdiag::
|
||||
|
||||
actdiag {
|
||||
write -> convert -> image
|
||||
lane user {
|
||||
label = "User"
|
||||
write [label = "Writing reST"];
|
||||
image [label = "Get diagram IMAGE"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
lane actdiag {
|
||||
convert [label = "Convert reST to Image"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
nwdiag
|
||||
|
||||
.. nwdiag::
|
||||
|
||||
nwdiag {
|
||||
network dmz {
|
||||
address = "210.x.x.x/24"
|
||||
|
||||
web01 [address = "210.x.x.1"];
|
||||
web02 [address = "210.x.x.2"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
network internal {
|
||||
address = "172.x.x.x/24";
|
||||
|
||||
web01 [address = "172.x.x.1"];
|
||||
web02 [address = "172.x.x.2"];
|
||||
db01;
|
||||
db02;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
seqdiag
|
||||
|
||||
.. seqdiag::
|
||||
|
||||
seqdiag {
|
||||
browser -> webserver [label = "GET /index.html"];
|
||||
browser <-- webserver;
|
||||
browser -> webserver [label = "POST /blog/comment"];
|
||||
webserver -> database [label = "INSERT comment"];
|
||||
webserver <-- database;
|
||||
browser <-- webserver;
|
||||
}
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue