Comment 1 for bug 1625558

Thanks for the bug report, can you provide a little more detail about what you'd like to see as the fix here?

I've been working on a script which basically creates a skeleton environment like:

  OS::TripleO::Foo: foo-templates/foo.yaml
  OS::TripleO::FooConfig: foo-templates/foo-config.yaml
  OS::TripleO::Foo::Net::SoftwareConfig: ../net-config-noop.yaml
  # Port assignments for the Foo role
  OS::TripleO::Foo::Ports::ExternalPort: ../network/ports/noop.yaml
  OS::TripleO::Foo::Ports::InternalApiPort: ../network/ports/noop.yaml
  OS::TripleO::Foo::Ports::StoragePort: ../network/ports/noop.yaml
  OS::TripleO::Foo::Ports::StorageMgmtPort: ../network/ports/noop.yaml
  OS::TripleO::Foo::Ports::TenantPort: ../network/ports/noop.yaml
  OS::TripleO::Foo::Ports::ManagementPort: ../network/ports/noop.yaml

This can then easily be customized in the same way as any other role, but I'm not sure we need to provide custom-role specific examples? (or do we?) I'd assumed folks would simply apply their preferred ports and network config based on knowledge of their existing non-custom roles?