API allows attaching physical, bond interface to VLAN with a known tag (Inconsistent with UI)
Bug #1552923 reported by
Blake Rouse
This bug affects 1 person
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAAS |
Fix Released
|
High
|
Blake Rouse | ||
| 1.9 |
Fix Released
|
High
|
Blake Rouse | ||
Bug Description
The API currently allows administrators to attach a physical or bond interface to a VLAN which is not an untagged vlan on a fabric. This does not match the UI which limits this. Also a VLAN interface can be attached to the untagged VLAN for the fabric.
This is inconsistent with the WebUI. Either MAAS supports placing a physical or bond interface on any VLAN or only the untagged VLAN. We cannot allow the API to do one thing and the UI to do another. It causes confusing for users, its in consistent, and its overall bad UX. Either we support one way or we support the other way, not 50% one way and 50% the other.
Related branches
lp://staging/~blake-rouse/maas/force-untagged-api
- Mike Pontillo (community): Approve
-
Diff: 840 lines (+227/-91)4 files modifiedsrc/maasserver/api/tests/test_interfaces.py (+21/-13)
src/maasserver/forms_interface.py (+55/-12)
src/maasserver/tests/test_forms_interface.py (+137/-57)
src/maasserver/websockets/handlers/tests/test_machine.py (+14/-9)
lp://staging/~blake-rouse/maas/fix-1566336-1.9
- Blake Rouse (community): Approve
-
Diff: 1205 lines (+409/-138)10 files modifiedsrc/maasserver/api/tests/test_interfaces.py (+21/-13)
src/maasserver/forms_interface.py (+55/-12)
src/maasserver/models/interface.py (+3/-2)
src/maasserver/models/signals/interfaces.py (+58/-18)
src/maasserver/models/signals/tests/test_interfaces.py (+46/-0)
src/maasserver/models/tests/test_interface.py (+55/-23)
src/maasserver/models/tests/test_staticipaddress.py (+3/-0)
src/maasserver/testing/factory.py (+17/-4)
src/maasserver/tests/test_forms_interface.py (+137/-57)
src/maasserver/websockets/handlers/tests/test_node.py (+14/-9)
| summary: |
- API allows attaching physical, bond interface to non untagged VLAN's + API allows attaching physical, bond interface to VLAN with a known tag |
Revision history for this message
| Mike Pontillo (mpontillo) wrote Re: API allows attaching physical, bond interface to VLAN with a known tag | #1 |
| summary: |
API allows attaching physical, bond interface to VLAN with a known tag + (Inconsistent with UI) |
| description: | updated |
Revision history for this message
| Blake Rouse (blake-rouse) wrote | #2 |
| Changed in maas: | |
| status: | Triaged → Fix Committed |
| no longer affects: | maas/1.10 |
| Changed in maas: | |
| assignee: | nobody → Blake Rouse (blake-rouse) |
| Changed in maas: | |
| status: | Fix Committed → Fix Released |
To post a comment you must log in.
Clarified title to make it clear what the issue is. (Previously the title referred to the term "untagged" as a property of the VLAN.)
MAAS currently refers to the "default" VLAN in a fabric as "untagged". This is ambiguous to MAAS administrators, since fabrics may have more than one "untagged" VLAN depending on the switch port. (That is, "untagged on VLAN X" is a property of a switch port.)
The MAAS out-of-the-box experience works best when all switch ports are on the same default ("untagged") VLAN, as that eliminates the ambiguity. (less unknowns are better for MAAS, since we don't model switches or switch ports.) But it is possible (and VERY common) to have more than one "untagged" VLAN per fabric. So by "fixing" this bug, we would effectively be forcing users to model a single fabric as two fabrics - a showstopper issue that prevents any customers who have shared VLANs between the "two" fabrics from using MAAS.