Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add application credentials support to OS for JS2 #260

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

almahmoud
Copy link
Member

@almahmoud almahmoud commented Jun 17, 2022

setup.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@almahmoud almahmoud changed the title [WIP] Add application credentials support to OS for JS2 Add application credentials support to OS for JS2 Sep 13, 2022
zone.get('region', {}).get('cloudbridge_settings'))
if creds.get('os_user_domain_id'):
domain_entry = f"domain-id={creds.get('os_user_domain_id')}"
os_user = creds.get('os_username')
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will os_username and os_password still work on Jetstream2? In my openrc file they have been replaced with
OS_APPLICATION_CREDENTIAL_ID and OS_APPLICATION_CREDENTIAL_SECRET

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

They will not on JS2, the point of this PR is to add support for application credentials. However, given that this is openstack in general, not just for JS2, it's good to leave both options, so other places, eg: Nectar, would still work with user/pass. A few lines below, there is a check for whether both username and password are passed, and otherwise it falls back on application credentials.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

NeCTAR also supports app creds. What if we drop the legacy creds in cloudlaunch, and just stick to app creds only? The UI would certainly become simpler. We can leave things as is in cloudbridge, since we don't want an interface change, but for cloudlaunch, we may as well? Would need to test complete flow through cloudman including adding nodes though. Something we may need to do regardless?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok I don't mind sticking to only app creds then

@nuwang nuwang force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from 39835ff to 78faf84 Compare September 14, 2022 20:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants