[RFE][floatingip port_forwarding] Add description field
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
| neutron |
Wishlist
|
Pedro Henrique Pereira Martins |
Bug Description
Problem Description
===================
As users create and update theirs floating ip rules, the reason
behind those rules might get lost throughout time. Moreover, in
an environment with many people writing rules, it is important
to track down the reason behind each one of the rules
created/added in a floating IP port forwarding configuration.
The addition of a description field would allow operators to
determine the reason why a rule was created and help the users
to know if the existence of a rule is still reasonable.
Proposed Change
===============
To address the described scenario, we propose to create a new
“description” field in the Neutron’s Floating IP port forwarding
rules API JSON. This new field will be a nullable String
containing the description/reason why this new port forwarding
rule is being created.
Example of a modified JSON:
{
"port_
"
"
"
"
"
"
}
}
Changed in neutron: | |
assignee: | nobody → Pedro Henrique Pereira Martins (pedrohpmartins) |
status: | New → In Progress |
Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq) wrote : | #2 |
Thx for reporting this rfe. I think this is pretty clear and is ready to be discussed on drivers team meeting.
One thing, did You consider to just add Standard Attributes to this resource? See https:/
tags: |
added: rfe-triaged removed: rfe |
Hi Slawek, thx for the reply.
Could you tell me when the drivers team meeting will occur?
http://
But maybe this Friday this meeting will be cancelled due to the OpenStack PTG.
Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq) wrote : | #5 |
Yes, this week meeting is cancelled. See http://
We will resume this meetings on November 15th
Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq) wrote : | #6 |
Hi,
We discussed this RFE on today's drivers meeting (http://
tags: |
added: rfe-approved removed: rfe-triaged |
Changed in neutron: | |
importance: | Undecided → Wishlist |
Changed in neutron: | |
milestone: | none → ussuri-1 |
Changed in neutron: | |
milestone: | ussuri-1 → none |
Reviewed: https:/
Committed: https:/
Submitter: Zuul
Branch: master
commit a37378e8d50e074
Author: pedro <email address hidden>
Date: Thu Oct 31 17:09:14 2019 -0300
Add description field in port forwarding API
Problem Description
===
As users create and update theirs floating ip rules, the reason
behind those rules might get lost throughout time. Moreover, in
an environment with many people writing rules, it is important
to track down the reason behind each one of the rules
created/added in a floating IP port forwarding configuration.
The addition of a description field would allow operators to
determine the reason why a rule was created and help the users
to know if the existence of a rule is still reasonable.
Proposed Change
===============
To address the described scenario, we propose to create a new
“description” field in the Neutron’s Floating IP port forwarding
rules API JSON. This new field will be a nullable String
containing the description/reason why this new port forwarding
rule is being created.
Change-Id: If98a70011b187d
Implements: blueprint portforwarding-
Closes-Bug: #1850818
Changed in neutron: | |
status: | In Progress → Fix Released |
This issue was fixed in the openstack/
Reviewed: https:/
Committed: https:/
Submitter: Zuul
Branch: master
commit 06e43dd95d39af5
Author: Pedro Henrique <email address hidden>
Date: Sun Jul 14 17:51:09 2019 -0300
Add description field to portforwarding NAT rules
Add the `description` field to `PortForwardings`
using the standard attributes like in the
`FloatingIPs`.
Depends-On: https:/
Depends-On: https:/
Implements: blueprint portforwarding-
Closes-Bug: #1850818
Change-Id: Ibac91d24da2b82
Signed-off-by: Pedro Martins <email address hidden>
This issue was fixed in the openstack/neutron 16.0.0.0b1 development milestone.
This issue was fixed in the openstack/
Fix proposed to branch: stable/train
Review: https:/
Change abandoned by Flavio Fernandes (<email address hidden>) on branch: stable/train
Review: https:/
Fix proposed to branch: master /review. opendev. org/692580
Review: https:/