Merge "Use a soft link for template.rst"
This commit is contained in:
Jenkins
Gerrit Code Review
commit
17b69c9df1
@ -1,384 +0,0 @@
|
|||||||
..
|
|
||||||
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/mogan/+spec/example
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing anything? A single paragraph of
|
|
||||||
prose that operators can understand. The title and this first paragraph
|
|
||||||
should be used as the subject line and body of the commit message
|
|
||||||
respectively.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Some notes about the mogan-spec and blueprint process:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Not all blueprints need a spec. For more information see
|
|
||||||
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/mogan/blueprints.html#specs
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* The aim of this document is first to define the problem we need to solve,
|
|
||||||
and second agree the overall approach to solve that problem.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* This is not intended to be extensive documentation for a new feature.
|
|
||||||
For example, there is no need to specify the exact configuration changes,
|
|
||||||
nor the exact details of any DB model changes. But you should still define
|
|
||||||
that such changes are required, and be clear on how that will affect
|
|
||||||
upgrades.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* You should aim to get your spec approved before writing your code.
|
|
||||||
While you are free to write prototypes and code before getting your spec
|
|
||||||
approved, its possible that the outcome of the spec review process leads
|
|
||||||
you towards a fundamentally different solution than you first envisaged.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* But, API changes are held to a much higher level of scrutiny.
|
|
||||||
As soon as an API change merges, we must assume it could be in production
|
|
||||||
somewhere, and as such, we then need to support that API change forever.
|
|
||||||
To avoid getting that wrong, we do want lots of details about API changes
|
|
||||||
upfront.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Some notes about using this template:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Your spec should be in ReSTructured text, like this template.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Please wrap text at 79 columns.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* The filename in the git repository should match the launchpad URL, for
|
|
||||||
example a URL of: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mogan/+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 and see the generated
|
|
||||||
HTML file in doc/build/html/specs/<path_of_your_file>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* If you would like to provide a diagram with your spec, ascii diagrams are
|
|
||||||
required. http://asciiflow.com/ is a very nice tool to assist with making
|
|
||||||
ascii diagrams. The reason for this is that the tool used to review specs is
|
|
||||||
based purely on plain text. Plain text will allow review to proceed without
|
|
||||||
having to look at additional files which can not be viewed in gerrit. It
|
|
||||||
will also allow inline feedback on the diagram itself.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* If your specification proposes any changes to the Mogan 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/mogan-specs+message:apiimpact,n,z
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Problem description
|
|
||||||
===================
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A detailed description of the problem. What problem is this blueprint
|
|
||||||
addressing?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Use Cases
|
|
||||||
---------
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
What use cases does this address? What impact on actors does this change have?
|
|
||||||
Ensure you are clear about the actors in each use case: Developer, End User,
|
|
||||||
Deployer etc.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
At this point, if you would like to just get feedback on if the problem and
|
|
||||||
proposed change fit in mogan, you can stop here and post this for review to get
|
|
||||||
preliminary feedback. If so please say:
|
|
||||||
Posting to get preliminary feedback on the scope of this spec.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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
|
|
||||||
---------------
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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 definition do not need to be included.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* URL for the resource
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* URL should not include underscores, and use hyphens instead.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Parameters which can be passed via the url
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* JSON schema definition for the request body data if allowed
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Field names should use snake_case style, not CamelCase or MixedCase
|
|
||||||
style.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* JSON schema definition for the response body data if any
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Field names should use snake_case style, not CamelCase or MixedCase
|
|
||||||
style.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Example use case including typical API samples for both data supplied
|
|
||||||
by the caller and the response
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Discuss any policy changes, and discuss what things a deployer needs to
|
|
||||||
think about when defining their policy.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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 as
|
|
||||||
a reference (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Security/Guidelines). 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.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Does this change have an impact on python-moganclient? What does the user
|
|
||||||
interface there look like?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Scheduler filters get called once per host for every instance being created,
|
|
||||||
so any latency they introduce is linear with the size of 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?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Developer impact
|
|
||||||
----------------
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Discuss things that will affect other developers working on OpenStack,
|
|
||||||
such as:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* If the blueprint proposes a change to the driver API, discussion of how
|
|
||||||
other hypervisors would implement the feature is required.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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 mogan, 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 Mogan, 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 the important scenarios needed to test here, as well as
|
|
||||||
specific edge cases we should be ensuring work correctly. For each
|
|
||||||
scenario please specify if this requires specialized hardware, a full
|
|
||||||
openstack environment, or can be simulated inside the Mogan tree.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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).
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Documentation Impact
|
|
||||||
====================
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Which audiences are affected most by this change, and which documentation
|
|
||||||
titles on docs.openstack.org should be updated because of this change? Don't
|
|
||||||
repeat details discussed above, but reference them here in the context of
|
|
||||||
documentation for multiple audiences. For example, the Operations Guide targets
|
|
||||||
cloud operators, and the End User Guide would need to be updated if the change
|
|
||||||
offers a new feature available through the CLI or dashboard. If a config option
|
|
||||||
changes or is deprecated, note here that the documentation needs to be updated
|
|
||||||
to reflect this specification's change.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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. if it's an EC2 thing, link the
|
|
||||||
EC2 docs)
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Anything else you feel it is worthwhile to refer to
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. list-table:: Revisions
|
|
||||||
:header-rows: 1
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* - Release Name
|
|
||||||
- Description
|
|
||||||
* - Ocata
|
|
||||||
- Introduced
|
|
||||||
1
specs/ocata/approved/template.rst
Symbolic link
1
specs/ocata/approved/template.rst
Symbolic link
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
|||||||
|
../../template.rst
|
||||||
@ -1,384 +0,0 @@
|
|||||||
..
|
|
||||||
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/mogan/+spec/example
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing anything? A single paragraph of
|
|
||||||
prose that operators can understand. The title and this first paragraph
|
|
||||||
should be used as the subject line and body of the commit message
|
|
||||||
respectively.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Some notes about the mogan-spec and blueprint process:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Not all blueprints need a spec. For more information see
|
|
||||||
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/mogan/blueprints.html#specs
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* The aim of this document is first to define the problem we need to solve,
|
|
||||||
and second agree the overall approach to solve that problem.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* This is not intended to be extensive documentation for a new feature.
|
|
||||||
For example, there is no need to specify the exact configuration changes,
|
|
||||||
nor the exact details of any DB model changes. But you should still define
|
|
||||||
that such changes are required, and be clear on how that will affect
|
|
||||||
upgrades.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* You should aim to get your spec approved before writing your code.
|
|
||||||
While you are free to write prototypes and code before getting your spec
|
|
||||||
approved, its possible that the outcome of the spec review process leads
|
|
||||||
you towards a fundamentally different solution than you first envisaged.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* But, API changes are held to a much higher level of scrutiny.
|
|
||||||
As soon as an API change merges, we must assume it could be in production
|
|
||||||
somewhere, and as such, we then need to support that API change forever.
|
|
||||||
To avoid getting that wrong, we do want lots of details about API changes
|
|
||||||
upfront.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Some notes about using this template:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Your spec should be in ReSTructured text, like this template.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Please wrap text at 79 columns.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* The filename in the git repository should match the launchpad URL, for
|
|
||||||
example a URL of: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mogan/+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 and see the generated
|
|
||||||
HTML file in doc/build/html/specs/<path_of_your_file>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* If you would like to provide a diagram with your spec, ascii diagrams are
|
|
||||||
required. http://asciiflow.com/ is a very nice tool to assist with making
|
|
||||||
ascii diagrams. The reason for this is that the tool used to review specs is
|
|
||||||
based purely on plain text. Plain text will allow review to proceed without
|
|
||||||
having to look at additional files which can not be viewed in gerrit. It
|
|
||||||
will also allow inline feedback on the diagram itself.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* If your specification proposes any changes to the Mogan 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/mogan-specs+message:apiimpact,n,z
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Problem description
|
|
||||||
===================
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A detailed description of the problem. What problem is this blueprint
|
|
||||||
addressing?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Use Cases
|
|
||||||
---------
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
What use cases does this address? What impact on actors does this change have?
|
|
||||||
Ensure you are clear about the actors in each use case: Developer, End User,
|
|
||||||
Deployer etc.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
At this point, if you would like to just get feedback on if the problem and
|
|
||||||
proposed change fit in mogan, you can stop here and post this for review to get
|
|
||||||
preliminary feedback. If so please say:
|
|
||||||
Posting to get preliminary feedback on the scope of this spec.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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
|
|
||||||
---------------
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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 definition do not need to be included.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* URL for the resource
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* URL should not include underscores, and use hyphens instead.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Parameters which can be passed via the url
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* JSON schema definition for the request body data if allowed
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Field names should use snake_case style, not CamelCase or MixedCase
|
|
||||||
style.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* JSON schema definition for the response body data if any
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Field names should use snake_case style, not CamelCase or MixedCase
|
|
||||||
style.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Example use case including typical API samples for both data supplied
|
|
||||||
by the caller and the response
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Discuss any policy changes, and discuss what things a deployer needs to
|
|
||||||
think about when defining their policy.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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 as
|
|
||||||
a reference (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Security/Guidelines). 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.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Does this change have an impact on python-moganclient? What does the user
|
|
||||||
interface there look like?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Scheduler filters get called once per host for every instance being created,
|
|
||||||
so any latency they introduce is linear with the size of 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?
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Developer impact
|
|
||||||
----------------
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Discuss things that will affect other developers working on OpenStack,
|
|
||||||
such as:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* If the blueprint proposes a change to the driver API, discussion of how
|
|
||||||
other hypervisors would implement the feature is required.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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 mogan, 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 Mogan, 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 the important scenarios needed to test here, as well as
|
|
||||||
specific edge cases we should be ensuring work correctly. For each
|
|
||||||
scenario please specify if this requires specialized hardware, a full
|
|
||||||
openstack environment, or can be simulated inside the Mogan tree.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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).
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Documentation Impact
|
|
||||||
====================
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Which audiences are affected most by this change, and which documentation
|
|
||||||
titles on docs.openstack.org should be updated because of this change? Don't
|
|
||||||
repeat details discussed above, but reference them here in the context of
|
|
||||||
documentation for multiple audiences. For example, the Operations Guide targets
|
|
||||||
cloud operators, and the End User Guide would need to be updated if the change
|
|
||||||
offers a new feature available through the CLI or dashboard. If a config option
|
|
||||||
changes or is deprecated, note here that the documentation needs to be updated
|
|
||||||
to reflect this specification's change.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
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. if it's an EC2 thing, link the
|
|
||||||
EC2 docs)
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Anything else you feel it is worthwhile to refer to
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. list-table:: Revisions
|
|
||||||
:header-rows: 1
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* - Release Name
|
|
||||||
- Description
|
|
||||||
* - Ocata
|
|
||||||
- Introduced
|
|
||||||
1
specs/pike/approved/template.rst
Symbolic link
1
specs/pike/approved/template.rst
Symbolic link
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
|||||||
|
../../template.rst
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user