18:03:16 #startmeeting Keystone 18:03:17 Meeting started Tue Mar 24 18:03:16 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is morganfainberg. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:03:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:03:21 The meeting name has been set to 'keystone' 18:03:21 Hi everyone! 18:03:25 howdy 18:03:29 morganfainberg, what was that? a salute? o] 18:03:36 ayoung, maybe 18:03:41 o/ 18:03:44 or "you must be this tall to enter the meeting..." 18:03:47 o- 18:03:54 ayoung: :( 18:03:54 we're all here ooooooooooooo 18:03:55 as stated we have results of FFEs 18:04:00 o/ 18:04:04 Hello 18:04:05 hello 18:04:06 #topic FFE Results 18:04:26 #info Domain-SQL FFE Granted, please complete the work by end of week (this week) 18:04:28 (^-^)ゝ 18:04:35 I'll be unblocking the reviews after the meeting 18:04:53 #info IDP Registration FFE Granted, please complete this work by EOW 18:04:59 hiya 18:05:11 #info ECP Wrap FFE Granted, Please complete this work by next meeting 18:05:28 morganfainberg: thanks 18:05:43 #info Reseller FFE - deferred until liberty. Risk based on restructuring of domains and scope of work is the reason for the delay. 18:06:08 just going to move quickly through the start of the meeting 18:06:13 most of it is just nnouncements 18:06:17 or reminders 18:06:18 all sounds good to me 18:06:35 #topic Use kilo-rc-potential tag for triage 18:06:50 If a bug is a nice to have (not a blocker) use the 'kilo-rc-potential' tag, do not assign it to the milestone 18:06:56 if it is a blocker put it on the milestone 18:07:11 #topic REMINDER: Feature Freeze and String Freeze in Effect. 18:07:15 we can merge bug fixes either way? 18:07:22 #undo 18:07:23 Removing item from minutes: 18:07:26 bknudson, yes. 18:07:36 bknudson, as long as the bug isn't risky to fix 18:07:44 or introduces violations of string freeze 18:07:45 etc 18:07:57 and once merged go ahead and tag it to the milestone 18:08:03 the tag is just for triage 18:08:13 #topic REMINDER: Feature Freeze and String Freeze in Effect. 18:08:16 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StringFreeze 18:08:31 please be aware of string freeze when approving code. 18:08:50 annnd thats it for my quick announcement stuff 18:09:01 on to the meat 18:09:11 #topic Log working group liasion 18:09:14 bknudson, o/ 18:09:30 there's a log working group that has held a couple of meetings 18:09:42 they're looking for a liaison from each project. 18:09:42 wiki? 18:10:05 Its Log Its log Its Log Its log its heavy its made out of wood 18:10:05 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings#OpenStack_Log_Working_Group_Meeting 18:10:26 ayoung, better than bad, it's good! 18:10:29 anyways, if someone wants to sign up to be the liaison for keystone then sign up. 18:10:41 if you love log 18:10:46 bknudson, I nominate Topol 18:10:52 bknudson: does it require sync responsibilities? 18:10:53 logs are kindof like audit 18:10:54 works for me. 18:11:10 best part is topol isn't here 18:11:12 they might ask about making changes in keystone. 18:11:25 ++ for Uncle Brad 18:11:33 (I’m actually Ok volunteeding if Topol is too bust) 18:11:33 to support whatever they're working on... e.g., request IDs 18:11:40 or busy even 18:11:52 ok so henrynash please cicleup w/ topol and figure out which (or both) will do it 18:12:03 morganfainberg: will do 18:12:20 henrynash, we can't spare you 18:12:26 henrynash: isn't that really late for you? 18:12:41 20:00 UTC 18:12:46 maybe we need to redo the meeting time. 18:13:15 bknudson: this one or the log-working-group ? 18:13:25 the log working group 18:13:31 henrynash if the time doesn't work out for you, please let me/keystone group know 18:13:36 henrynash, we can look for another liason 18:13:42 (aaah and if its 20:00 UTC then I may withdraw my application :-) ) 18:14:41 topol & I will chat 18:14:43 it's beer time for henrynash :-) 18:14:45 ok, that was it. if you're interested attend the meeting. 18:14:48 henrynash, sounds good. 18:15:02 if we don't have any other volunteers i will do it - henrynash let me know if you/topol can't 18:15:03 on the topic of logs 18:15:05 logging in keystone is not the best. 18:15:09 #topic Drop curl notation in logs (especially server-side logs) 18:15:13 you might have noticed. 18:15:36 The request came that we should adjust the logging from KSC to not be "curl" debugging. you can't use the line anymore due to the obfuscation of the token 18:15:54 this is really more relevant from the session object itself not KSC. 18:16:01 what do they want that's so much better? 18:16:02 morganfainberg: but you see how to call this line if you need to... 18:16:11 give the important information but not wrap it in curl 18:16:17 thats all that was being asked 18:16:21 i said we'd bring it up at the meeting 18:16:22 systemd and journald of course! 18:16:26 didn't say anything else. 18:16:31 make it an option 18:16:38 i like the curl command, i have used it a number of times - though i must say it's a pain that we obsfucated the token 18:16:48 bknudson, i think it's fair that we offer a logging format 18:16:50 jamielennox: ++ 18:17:02 they can always mock it. 18:17:12 my answer to everything now. 18:17:27 bknudson, if we just make it an option - a simple formatter that has known replacements i think that is sufficient 18:17:40 and again this is session 18:17:43 not ksc proper 18:18:09 the complaint comes from running nova in debug and seeing curl debug lines talking to neutron 18:18:19 use log filters? 18:18:25 anyway. nothing to be done yet, please mull it over when thinking about logging 18:18:33 and logging enhancements 18:18:40 that definitely isn't very handy to have curl lines there, and I assume it's a lot shorter to not use it. 18:19:13 bkundson, some of us still using curl for troubleshooting 18:19:18 bknudson, i would agree we could be more terse in that case. it's one place our logging is good just in a not-that-useful format 18:20:07 is there a different log level we could emit it on? 18:20:08 we can circle up on that as we have more logging discussion 18:20:09 it'll still have all the info 18:20:13 trace3 or something? 18:20:25 jamielennox, once trace is a thing again, yes 18:20:32 jamielennox: or maybe even try to separate curl logging and store in different file?! 18:20:33 jamielennox, or something like that 18:20:33 morganfainberg, sounds like a spec is required there. If we are going to be picky about log formats, we should actually design them 18:20:45 ayoung, yeah. it's something to revisit in L. 18:20:46 use tract now and it'll get logged higher than error 18:20:48 trace 18:21:05 really? didn't know that 18:21:12 bknudson, yeah it has to wait until trace is again a "trace" level not a "traceback" thing 18:21:31 lets revisit in L 18:21:37 we wont get much done on this in kilo anyway 18:21:37 marekd: it'd require some sort of filter to seperate becasue other things in session log to debug 18:21:45 whatever you replace it with the general output is super handy 18:21:57 with the split of session and common stuff out of ksc coming in L it becomes interesting to consider 18:22:12 just recently used it to discover that keystone was returning an unroutable address to deal with tokens at which of course made nova/neutron fail 18:22:13 clarkb, yes, the data needs to stay. 18:22:24 clarkb, no question we don't want to eliminate any of the info 18:22:35 clarkb, just maybe not add "curl" in the line 18:22:40 and curl "flags" 18:22:40 he he 18:22:46 --insecure? 18:22:52 bknudson, sigh yeah... 18:23:10 that would be one i'd like to *NOT* log 18:23:27 anyway 18:23:29 should log a warning every time. 18:23:34 bknudson CRITICAL 18:23:43 :P 18:23:48 ok moooooving on 18:24:01 #topic keystoneclient release: auth-token-use-client 18:24:05 bknudson, o/ again 18:24:20 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144248/ 18:24:22 oh, just wondering if we wanted a release of keystoneclient 18:24:29 I do :) 18:24:34 bknudson, we will have one for sure with RC 18:24:37 HMT stuff is there 18:24:37 we can do another one earlier 18:24:40 then I can make progress on my middleware bp to use keystoneclient. 18:25:01 bknudson, i can cut a release today if you want... just remember g-r wont be updated 18:25:07 so you can't really rely on the new stuff 18:25:12 or g-r might not be updated 18:25:18 for a bit? till L? 18:25:26 * morganfainberg isn't sure about the client minimums 18:25:27 I can deal with that. 18:25:34 i'm pretty sure g-r is frozen for kilo 18:25:39 btw, are we still using keyring in keystoneclient? 18:25:48 amakarov, ^ jamielennox 18:25:52 worst that they can do to me is -2 18:25:54 amakarov: are we at all using it? 18:26:06 I hope that's the worst they can do. 18:26:09 jamielennox: what is g-r 18:26:10 bknudson, i'll plan a ksc release today or tomorrow 18:26:14 marekd, global requirements 18:26:15 thanks! 18:26:15 amakarov: it's still there, i'd be 50/50 if it works 18:26:29 marekd, I was asked about it yesterday and found remains of it in the code 18:26:36 keystone CLI is deprecated 18:26:41 amakarov: merged or proposed ? 18:26:42 #action morganfainberg to release keystoneclient March 24 or 25 18:26:45 it doesn't work with session and plugins 18:27:06 amakarov we can't remove it if people use ksc cli 18:27:08 marekd, I think, just forgotten :) 18:27:10 and rely on it 18:27:17 but ... ksc's cli is deprecated 18:27:31 unless someone finds a security problem we will not be updating/changing it. 18:27:35 morganfainberg, well, but --os-keyring parameter isn't there 18:27:36 openstack client is way better 18:27:44 there's a message and everything now to say deprecated 18:27:50 which reminds me of something i need to bug stevemar about... 18:27:56 but not here 18:28:14 doesn't openstackclient use keystone client? 18:28:17 morganfainberg, the question was from documentation team and I was a little confused 18:28:17 actually 18:28:19 morganfainberg, another time, osc meeting is on thursday 18:28:23 clarkb, not the CLI part 18:28:27 clarkb, yeah, but not the CLI parts 18:28:39 stevemar, jamielennox, so ran into an issue trying to use OSC for bootstrapping a cloud 18:29:02 stevemar, jamielennox, might be an old version of osc, i'll check with some folks and make sure to file appropriate bugs. 18:29:25 but it basically errored all over the place when trying to do things w/ the admin token for bootstrap, and we had to use keystone cli to make it work. 18:29:42 stevemar, jamielennox, so maybe a doc update is needed. 18:29:49 i'll get you guys info on it 18:29:54 morganfainberg, the token_endpoint plugin still works for me 18:29:57 morganfainberg, sounds like an old issue, yeah get us info 18:30:00 seems like should use keystone-manage for that and get rid of admin token 18:30:02 hey, bknudson - guess what? 18:30:03 too scary 18:30:11 bknudson, yes i expect to be proposing that for L 18:30:38 morganfainberg: what? 18:30:40 #topic bandit update 18:30:46 bknudson, o/ you again 18:30:50 y, so they released bandit today 18:30:52 it's on pypi 18:30:56 yay 18:31:04 so the next step is to get an experimental job in infra 18:31:07 What is bandit and why do we care? 18:31:22 ayoung, its pretty neat 18:31:23 bandit is the static code analysis for security issues 18:31:36 we had a presentation at this meeting a few weeks ago 18:31:43 Right...I recall it 18:31:45 ayoung: #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Security/Projects/Bandit 18:31:48 forgot the name, though 18:31:53 bknudson, +1 on the infra change from me. 18:32:11 and there's a review to add the tox target 18:32:20 bknudson: nice 18:32:25 bknudson: how do we use tox + bandit ? 18:32:27 * morganfainberg is excited to see bandit run. 18:32:28 tox -ebandit 18:32:33 marekd, that is the idea 18:32:33 bknudson: is there a review already up for the exp. job? 18:32:37 and it would analyze the code? 18:32:52 lbragstad: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/157595/ 18:32:56 is the infra review 18:33:10 once that merges I'll do recheck experimental a few times to make sure it works 18:33:12 bknudson: cool, thanks! 18:33:15 then I'll probably update the job to nonvotine 18:33:18 nonvoting 18:33:20 hopefully a non-voting gate, I do worry about the false positives 18:33:23 and then update to make it voting. 18:33:32 if people are happy with it. 18:33:38 ++ 18:33:48 gyee, long term voting, but it'll go non-vote first 18:33:50 we can discuss that later. 18:34:06 that was it. 18:34:11 bknudson, i assume it'll be a check-only right? 18:34:14 even voting? 18:34:14 we'll be the first to get it. 18:34:17 vs. gate? 18:34:21 right now it's experimental 18:34:26 static code analysis I dealt with in the past tend to give out a ton of false positives 18:34:38 gyee: we've got more control over bandit. 18:34:50 right but longer view, doesn't need to be gate job, could remain check only 18:34:51 gyee: i've been playing with this for a while and i don't think it'll be too much on an issue 18:34:55 anyway 18:35:01 uhm... 18:35:13 so 2 more quick things. 18:35:43 #topic no-spec BP review 18:35:51 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/python-keystoneclient/+spec/plugin-wrapper 18:36:00 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/python-keystoneclient/+spec/generic-plugins 18:36:13 for the record i'm ok with this not having a spec 18:36:23 but please feel free to voice concerns if they need them 18:36:49 * bknudson votes no spec reqd for these. 18:36:54 same here 18:37:12 me too 18:37:13 i see no reason to require it 18:37:16 although I wouldn't mind one. 18:37:31 bknudson, no spec required != no spec provided 18:37:32 since it would be nice to see a code sample 18:37:32 ;) 18:37:32 yea, i don't think they need a spec, they're both reasonably trivial just more of a new feature than a bug 18:37:53 ok going onece 18:37:57 twice..... 18:38:00 works for me 18:38:19 jamielennox: please update the BPs and provide a link to this meeting notes saying no-spec confimed 18:38:46 having said that there is a spec out for KSC that i'd like to bring to peoples attention: https://review.openstack.org/164582 18:39:13 actually it's middleware i guess 18:39:16 jamielennox: for K? 18:39:26 bknudson: doesn't matter it's client side 18:39:33 ah 18:39:42 well, it matters what deployers ship 18:40:01 bknudson, right 18:40:10 #topic Open Discussion 18:40:11 I mean packagers 18:40:43 bknudson: i don't mind if we don't merge till L, it won't make g-r for Kilo and there really isn't many services using the auth plugin yet anyway 18:40:53 I have a question. Does anyone know if other projects build on the bind supplied in the token? 18:41:01 jamielennox: I thought it was in devstack? 18:41:07 auth plugin 18:41:18 lbragstad, the bind like krb5 stuff? 18:41:23 I just wanted to say that I will be unavailable next two weeks (actually starting from Friday afternoon), so if you have something you want me to do or talk please let's do this this week. 18:41:33 So...FreeIPA and LDAP testing in Check. I think it is time 18:41:41 but it's possibly contentious as it will mean sending an X-Service-Token on every request and taking over control of the X-OpenStack-Request-ID 18:41:42 I think we want to push toward this: 18:41:44 ayoung, functional scenarios. yes. 18:41:51 ayoung, 100% 18:42:02 infra has an Ipa server that is basically untouched. We put a bunch of sample data in it 18:42:06 bknudson: oh yea, that's in. This is the auth plugin that middleware passes to the services ENV['keystone.token_auth'] i think 18:42:16 morganfainberg: the bind method that can be supplied on auth 18:42:18 on Gate, "mount" it as an external domain 18:42:19 ayoung, lets circle up on that. 18:42:40 lbragstad: afaik token binding never really got off the ground 18:42:46 ayoung, there are some mechanics about that proposal that wont really fly atm. 18:42:51 morganfainberg, and it will be the live test of henrynash 's domain in db code 18:42:58 jamielennox: ok, so you're not aware of anyone using it through the client? 18:43:03 ayoung, but it's just about standup not the test part 18:43:13 ayoung: yippee 18:43:25 lbragstad: the way services shuffle the token around from service to service means as soon as we started to actually enforce things on binding everything stopped 18:43:31 morganfainberg, ok. We'll talk After you get your coffee 18:43:41 lbragstad: i'm not even sure it's exposed via the client 18:43:46 jamielennox, i have an idea for L for that 18:43:48 jamielennox: ok, cool 18:43:56 morganfainberg: me too 18:44:06 just because bind will put fernet tokens in the "unbound" case 18:44:07 jamielennox, as soon as we get the FFEs done i'll start my write up for some ideas in L 18:44:33 morganfainberg: it's basically X-Service-Token and if you have something different you should probably -1 that blueprint i just mentioned 18:44:34 have to bail a little early to get my kids - i'll be back in the main channel in a bit 18:44:39 lbragstad, it would be nice to have token bind support in fernet - but that *could* land in L when we discuss how we address this. 18:44:43 lbragstad: ah 18:44:54 jamielennox, i have a different idea - slightly but it builds on service tokens 18:45:29 lbragstad: yea i think your safe, in future i want to get it back, but it should always be optional additional data to the token so we can add it back later 18:45:32 you're 18:45:47 morganfainberg: jamielennox yeah, unless when know how we can supply a format for it, it will boat the token. I'm not sure if it would make sense to put bind in the token format if it's only going to bloat it and no one uses it? 18:45:51 jamielennox, i'll write up my Liberty thoughts soon. i need to anyway for when i do the PTL election things. 18:46:14 s/when/we/ 18:46:20 lbragstad, again it can probably wait till L when we have a direct path to supporting bind or a similar thing. 18:46:31 lbragstad, i think it would be useful but it's not critical today 18:46:40 morganfainberg: ok, so I'll untag that bug for rc1? 18:46:47 sure 18:46:51 and update it with a comment 18:47:01 downgrade it to medium if it isn't already 18:47:19 morganfainberg: cool, it's already medium 18:47:59 anything else for the meeting? 18:48:21 we can let infra have the channel early it looks like 18:48:30 revocation issue: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141854/ 18:48:35 aha 18:48:51 will it be fixed by fernet tokens 18:49:10 or it must to be done something? 18:49:12 i think adam is correct, the issue is in the group data not being in the token. 18:49:20 ++ 18:50:11 i would like to see better revocations 18:50:25 so yes this would be a nice-to-have in kilo if we can really solve it 18:50:26 so the solution is: 1) add group to revocation model; 2) wait for fernet? 18:50:52 *rely on fernet (afaik it is complete) 18:51:10 amakarov, i think we would need to update the token body format as well 18:51:13 to catch PKI tokens 18:51:21 we don't want token formats to diverge in functionality too much 18:51:25 (at all really) 18:51:31 if it's in our tree that is 18:51:50 uuid could be solved in much the same way fernet is 18:52:44 can we just add group to existing tokens? 18:52:50 token models 18:53:18 amakarov: i think lbragstad and dolphm would start to sharpen their knives for you 18:53:46 i hardly survived federation 18:54:03 marekd, thanks for the warning )) 18:54:41 marekd: :) 18:55:29 well, let us put it this way: I'll propose a change and then we discuss it 18:55:42 I still don't see obvious solution 18:56:10 ok i think this conversation can move back to -keystone 18:56:14 lets continue there 18:56:22 Thanks for coming all! 18:56:25 #endmeeting