Skip to content

Proposal for sync operator - #2231

Open
geetikabatra wants to merge 1 commit into
rackerlabs:mainfrom
geetikabatra:geetika/ipsync-proposal-update
Open

Proposal for sync operator#2231
geetikabatra wants to merge 1 commit into
rackerlabs:mainfrom
geetikabatra:geetika/ipsync-proposal-update

Conversation

@geetikabatra

Copy link
Copy Markdown

What does this change do?

Upgrade impact

  • This change requires operator action to upgrade. If checked, add the
    upgrade-impact label and a release note: run scriv create from the
    repository root and describe the required action in the generated
    changelog.d/ file. See RELEASING.md.

Operator action means anything a deployment has to do beyond a normal resync:
deploy repo or values changes, new or removed secrets, enabling or disabling a
component, or a manual one-time step.

@cardoe cardoe left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So I think this would be good to bring into the ADR repo since it'll be rendered there appropriately but this is great. Thank you for working on it.

Comment thread docs/proposals/ipsync.md
Nautobot merely records. The stricter reading — every VLAN declared in git
before a tenant can use it — would mean giving up tenant self-service network
creation, since a tenant API call cannot wait on a merge. This needs agreement
before VLANs are implemented, because it decides whether the event path stays.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No. Tenant allocations are going to be dynamic which is why we're just providing the VLAN range, which is provided by the VLAN group.

Comment thread docs/proposals/ipsync.md
2. **What should happen to a hand edit made directly in Nautobot** to a static
type? As specified it is reverted on the next reconcile, silently. Reverting is
right, but it may be worth reporting rather than doing quietly, so the person
who made the edit finds out.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Things should be reverted. Ultimately hand edits is what got us here in the first place but folks keep getting around the removal of permissions.

Comment thread docs/proposals/ipsync.md
relationship — and how do we backfill objects nautobotop already created?
2. **Can the global cluster reach site Neutron/Ironic APIs?** Sites reaching
global is confirmed; this direction is not, and it decides whether we need a
per-site agent.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It can but we'll have to define that mechanism for it to do so.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants