No hostname validation in launch instance angularjs panel

Bug #1490850 reported by Marcos Lobo
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
OpenStack Dashboard (Horizon)
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Horizon Juno does not have hostname validation in AngularJS launch instance form. For example, you can create a new instance with name: "#3rtttt"

That name will cause problems when Nova try to handle, but Horizon allow launch a new instance with a not valid hostname. A valid hostname is specified in RFC1123 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1123).

This patch is quite similar to https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1458800 but the validation happens in different layers. In my opinion, the same validation in those two different layers is not a problem, meanwhile Horizon supports "basic launch instance form" and the new AngularJS launch instance form.

Revision history for this message
OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack) wrote : Fix proposed to horizon (stable/kilo)

Fix proposed to branch: stable/kilo
Review: https://review.openstack.org/219201

Revision history for this message
OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack) wrote : Fix proposed to horizon (master)

Fix proposed to branch: master
Review: https://review.openstack.org/244145

Changed in horizon:
assignee: nobody → Marcos Lobo (marcos-fermin-lobo)
status: New → In Progress
Revision history for this message
OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack) wrote : Change abandoned on horizon (stable/kilo)

Change abandoned by Marcos Fermín Lobo (<email address hidden>) on branch: stable/kilo
Review: https://review.openstack.org/219201

Revision history for this message
Marcos Lobo (marcos-fermin-lobo) wrote :

The new patch is based in Master branch

Revision history for this message
Rob Cresswell (robcresswell-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

Could you give an example of how Nova handles this? I'm not familiar with Novas validation, and its unclear why we've chosen the RFC (unless Nova is using the same, and we're merely mirroring it?)

Changed in horizon:
status: In Progress → Incomplete
Changed in horizon:
status: Incomplete → In Progress
Revision history for this message
OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack) wrote : Change abandoned on horizon (master)

Change abandoned by David Lyle (<email address hidden>) on branch: master
Review: https://review.openstack.org/244145
Reason: This review is > 4 weeks without comment, and failed Jenkins the last time it was checked. We are abandoning this for now. Feel free to reactivate the review by pressing the restore button and leaving a 'recheck' comment to get fresh test results.

Revision history for this message
OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack) wrote : Fix proposed to horizon (master)

Fix proposed to branch: master
Review: https://review.openstack.org/459692

Changed in horizon:
assignee: Marcos Lobo (marcos-fermin-lobo) → Mateusz Kowalski (makowals)
Revision history for this message
Mateusz Kowalski (makowals) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Gary W. Smith (gary-w-smith) wrote :

In the current horizon I can choose the name #3rtttt, and the instance launches fine and goes to the active state. What specific problems does this cause in Nova? If Nova does have problems with this name, shouldn't it reject it?

Changed in horizon:
status: In Progress → Incomplete
Revision history for this message
Akihiro Motoki (amotoki) wrote :

I can create a new server whose name is #3rtttt even when I used 'nova' CLI. Horizon can add a validation that nova applies, but it seems nova has no check to prevent from using a name like #3rtttt in creating a server. From this observation, we will reject this bug as Invalid. If nova applies a validation on server name, feel free to open a new bug.

Changed in horizon:
status: Incomplete → Invalid
assignee: Mateusz Kowalski (makowals) → nobody
Revision history for this message
OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack) wrote : Change abandoned on horizon (master)

Change abandoned by Ivan Kolodyazhny (<email address hidden>) on branch: master
Review: https://review.openstack.org/459692
Reason: This review is > 4 months without comment, and failed Jenkins the last time it was checked. We are abandoning this for now. Feel free to reactivate the review by pressing the restore button and leaving a 'recheck' comment to get fresh test results.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.