[RFE] Enhance ilo drivers to do inband inspection along with OOB inspection

[Vladyslav Drok]

The ilo drivers cannot determine few of the capabilities/properties OOB. It needs to use ironic inspector for it. For example, disk-size.
Secondly, we would like customers to have the option of using inspector with ilo drivers also as it discovers some capabilities which ilo drivers doesnt discover.

A config variable "oob_inspection_only" with default value of "True" will be introduced. If this is set to true, then ilo drivers perform only out-of-band inspection. If this is set to "False" ilo drivers inspection will perform inband inspection after out-of-band inspection. The properties from out-of-band and inband inspection both will be populated in node.properties.

This requires the spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/305864/ to be approved for virtual media and then iLO drivers can implement inband inspection for vmedia drivers.

[Vladyslav Drok (vdrok)]

Copy of whiteboard:

Gerrit topic: https://review.openstack.org/#q,topic:bp/enhance-ilo-drivers-for-inband-discovery,n,z

Addressed by: https://review.openstack.org/201904
    Enhance ilo drivers to do inband inspection

Addressed by: https://review.openstack.org/214357
    WIP: inband discovery in ilo

[Jim Rollenhagen (jim-rollenhagen)]

Is this still needed?

[OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack)]

Fix proposed to branch: master
Review: https://review.openstack.org/343577

[Nisha Agarwal (agarwalnisha1980)]

Please could you reanalyse if the spec is really needed for this RFE.

[Nisha Agarwal (agarwalnisha1980)]

Removed the tag myself so that it can be analyzed whether it needs spec or not. If spec is needed, its already raised and request reviewers to look at it.

[Ruby Loo (rloo)]

Please don't remove a tag that was added. If you are unsure, then ask why.

[Nisha Agarwal (agarwalnisha1980)]

rloo, please see the discussion here. I wasn't aware that I shud have added the discussion here. I removed the tag so it can be analyzed again as per discussion.
the link is : http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-ironic/%23openstack-ironic.2016-11-09.log.html
---
Nisha_away jroll, other ironic members, i have a query. I wanted to understand when does a RFE require a spec.
Nisha_away I have heard that RFE can be approved without the spec also 15:29
vdrok Nisha_away: I think it's decided on case by case basis 15:30
vdrok Nisha_away: just file an rfe, if it needs a spec, you eill be told about that in the bug 15:30
Nisha_away vdrok, ok. i wanted to understand it for the existing RFE 15:30
jroll Nisha_away: yes, what vdrok said. anything that is a bit complex, changes API/RPC, affects upgrades, etc usually needs a spec 15:31
jroll Nisha_away: then ask about that RFE :) 15:31
Nisha_away vdrok, for instance https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/1526382 15:31
openstack Launchpad bug 1526382 in Ironic "[RFE] Enhance ilo drivers to do inband inspection along with OOB inspection" [Wishlist,In progress] - Assigned to Aparna (aparnavtce) 15:31
Nisha_away this actually requires https://review.openstack.org/305864 to be merged 15:31
patchbot patch 305864 - ironic-specs - Boot management for in-band inspection 15:32

Nisha_away and then when inspector start supporting virtual media as boot device, then ilo drivers just use that 15:32
Nisha_away to start supporting inband inspection 15:33
Nisha_away vdrok ^^^ 15:33
Nisha_away jroll ^^^ 15:35
vdrok Nisha_away: soo, the rfe bug you linked has needs-spec tag, which is pretty self-describing :) 15:35
jroll Nisha_away: to be approved without a spec, the RFE would need more details on the changes... since you already have the spec written I think we should just review that 15:35
vdrok yep, it needs the spec 15:35
jroll vdrok: I added that because it had a spec, to be honest 15:35
vdrok ah

[Ruby Loo (rloo)]

@Nisha. I don't see anything in that irc discussion you pasted in comment #7 that indicates that you should have removed the needs-spec tag.

Also, as jroll mentions in that same irc discussion "to be approved without a spec, the RFE would need more details on the changes".

I am not that familiar with the state of ilo in ironic. How is oob inspection done currently with ilo, how will in-band inspection be done with ilo (how will the user choose whether to do oob or in-band)? w/o knowing those two, I don't know if your proposed oob_inspection_only config is a good choice. What group/section of the config file were you proposing to add that config? Why obb first, then inband second? Why not inband first, then oob second?

Given the questions I have above, I am still inclined to leave the needs-spec tag unless you can clearly describe in this rfe, the scope of work, etc.

Lastly, w/o the inband inspection spec being approved, it seems premature to be spending time on this spec. If the inband inspection spec changes, that would affect this spec.

[Ruby Loo (rloo)]

By the way, in case you haven't seen our documentation about the RFE process: http://docs.openstack.org/developer/ironic/dev/code-contribution-guide.html#adding-new-features

[OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack)]

Change abandoned by Nisha Agarwal (<email address hidden>) on branch: master
Review: https://review.opendev.org/201904

[Julia Kreger (juliaashleykreger)]

At this point, moving to won't fix. I actually think this was done, in part, but realistically given the move among vendors to standards based interfaces, I just don't see additional functionality going in such as this.