[RFE] Allow annotations on Neutron resources

Bug #1483480 reported by James Dempsey on 2015-08-11
40
This bug affects 8 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
neutron
Wishlist
Kevin Benton

Bug Description

Management of security groups and rules is very difficult without the ability to annotate. Some sort of optional annotation field on Neutron resources would make the cloud much more usable.

If I understand what this is correctly, I think we have had a number of requests in this area already. See the pointers below (in chronological order) and let us know this is what you mean:

- https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/core-resource-tags
- https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1460222
- https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1489291 (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/216021/)

Changed in neutron:
status: New → Confirmed
Tom Fifield (fifieldt) on 2015-09-10
tags: added: ops
Kyle Mestery (mestery) wrote :

I think that [1] should satisfy this use case. James, can you confirm that for me? Thanks!

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/216021/

James Dempsey (jamespd) wrote :

Thanks for the quick response, Armando and Kyle.

Regarding https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1489291 (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/216021/)...

I think this introduces some inconsistencies in the way resource 'descriptions' would be stored...

With a tags-based implementation, if a user wants the description for a security group rule via the API, they have to get the security group, and then filter the tags according to whatever format everyone agreed to use for descriptions. How would users make sure that they are using the same format as Horizon or Heat? I think it is core to my use case that users be able to see security group descriptions in Horizon.

This is in contrast to getting the description of a security group: Get the security group and access the description attribute.

I think that resource tags are great, but this seems like a non-intuitive workaround for a specific data model problem: Security Groups have descriptions, but Security Group Rules do not.

I think that the other changes mentioned by Armando suffer from the same problem (with respect to my use case, of course).

Thanks!

Are you saying that adding a description field to security group rule would solve your use case?

James Dempsey (jamespd) wrote :

Yes, that would satisfy my users' use case. I can see a more general use case for descriptions on all neutron resources, but I don't get many requests for that, so perhaps it isn't necessary.

Changed in neutron:
importance: Undecided → Wishlist

work [1], should make this relatively trivial. To be discussed at the drivers meeting.

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/222079/

Changed in neutron:
status: Confirmed → Triaged
Henry Gessau (gessau) on 2015-11-24
summary: - RFE - Allow annotations on Neutron resources
+ [RFE] Allow annotations on Neutron resources

If someone wants to take over and follow Kevin's work, this should be an easy low-hanging-fruit.

tags: added: low-hanging-fruit
tags: added: rfe-approved
removed: rfe
James Dempsey (jamespd) wrote :

Thanks Armando, I'll give this change a try.

Changed in neutron:
assignee: nobody → James Dempsey (jamespd)
Changed in neutron:
milestone: none → mitaka-1
Changed in neutron:
milestone: mitaka-1 → mitaka-2

Fix proposed to branch: master
Review: https://review.openstack.org/269887

Changed in neutron:
status: Triaged → In Progress
Changed in neutron:
milestone: mitaka-2 → mitaka-3
James Dempsey (jamespd) wrote :

After asking the ML, Kevin Benton suggested I stick with a model extension for consistency with the Security Group model.

See: "[openstack-dev] [neutron] StandardAttributes overlap with existing data models"

Change abandoned by Armando Migliaccio (<email address hidden>) on branch: master
Review: https://review.openstack.org/269887

Needs a new volunteer.

Changed in neutron:
status: In Progress → Incomplete
assignee: James Dempsey (jamespd) → nobody
milestone: mitaka-3 → none

Anyone willing to take over?

Changed in neutron:
assignee: nobody → Kevin Benton (kevinbenton)
status: Incomplete → In Progress
Changed in neutron:
milestone: none → mitaka-3
Changed in neutron:
assignee: Kevin Benton (kevinbenton) → Hirofumi Ichihara (ichihara-hirofumi)
Changed in neutron:
milestone: mitaka-3 → mitaka-rc1
Changed in neutron:
assignee: Hirofumi Ichihara (ichihara-hirofumi) → Kevin Benton (kevinbenton)

Reviewed: https://review.openstack.org/269887
Committed: https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/neutron/commit/?id=5dacbba701037200f9b0ae40c34981ecd941b41c
Submitter: Jenkins
Branch: master

commit 5dacbba701037200f9b0ae40c34981ecd941b41c
Author: Kevin Benton <email address hidden>
Date: Wed Feb 10 17:00:21 2016 -0800

    Add a description field to all standard resources

    In order to give users and operators more flexibility in
    annotating the purpose of various Neutron resources, this patch
    adds a description field limited to 255 chars to all of the
    Neutron resources that reference the standard attribute table.
    The resource that reference the table are the following:
    security_group_rules, security_groups, ports, subnets,
    networks, routers, floatingips, subnetpools

    This patch adds a description table related to standard attributes
    and migrates over the existing security group description to the new
    table as well.

    Co-Authored-By: James Dempsey <email address hidden>

    APIImpact
    DocImpact: Adds a description field to all resources outline in
               commit message.
    Closes-Bug: #1483480
    Change-Id: I6e1ef53d7aae7d04a5485810cc1db0a8eb125953

Changed in neutron:
status: In Progress → Fix Released

This issue was fixed in the openstack/neutron 8.0.0.0rc1 release candidate.

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

Duplicates of this bug

Other bug subscribers