Add external_openstack_cacert file from host

[Nathanael-Mtd]

What type of PR is this?
/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:
Same as with the in-tree openstack cloud controller, copy external_openstack_cacert file retrieved from ansible host to the control-plane for secret creation.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

It remove the needs of manual copy of the openstack ca-cert file to the first control plane.

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: Nathanael-Mtd / name: Nathanaël M. (5a8e019)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @Nathanael-Mtd!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/kubespray 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/kubespray has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @Nathanael-Mtd. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[mzaian]

/ok-to-test

[yankay]

/lgtm

[yankay]

/retest

[ant31]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ant31, mzaian, Nathanael-Mtd

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [ant31,mzaian]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[k8s-ci-robot]

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

[Nathanael-Mtd]

Hi @yankay, I made a mistake the last time with a merge request instead of rebase (but fixed since weeks), and lgtm tag was removed. Can you re-check if it's ok, and @ErikJiang can you review this PR please ?
Thank you !

[VannTen]

Can you squash the fix commit into the first ? Except that, this should be good.

[Nathanael-Mtd]

@VannTen Done. Thank you

[VannTen]

I missed a few things, see comments.

[VannTen]

Same as above

[VannTen]

Not actually resolved, please remove the is defined check

[Nathanael-Mtd]

@VannTen I changed the behavior to make the same configuration as cinder by using cacert directly from hostPath instead of secret

[VannTen]

(also, don't forge to run pre-commit before pushing (I know I always do !), it helps catch some stuff.

[VannTen]

Not actually resolved, please remove the is defined check

[VannTen]

Same here

[Nathanael-Mtd]

Done, I think it's fine now !

[VannTen]

Hum, I didn't mean to remove all the check , only the `is defined` part. The idea basically is that every time we have something like = ```yaml when: - some_var is defined - some_var == 'some_value' ``` we should almost always have instead `some_var` defined to a default value in the role defaults/ folder, and only: ``` when: - some == 'some_value' ``` Is that clearer ? And sorry for the misunderstanding

[Nathanael-Mtd]

Yes but I tried to be coherent with cinder config before : https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubespray/blob/master/roles/kubernetes-apps/csi_driver/cinder/tasks/main.yml#L13
But no problem, I understand now, I will keep the length > 0 !

[VannTen]

Don't worry, the codebase does not follow this strictly (T_T) but it should ! That's why I ask for that kind of cleanups in review, so we can tend towards a better state.

[VannTen]

Re-reading your changes, isn't that a breaking change ? If I read correctly, changing from slurp to copy means that user who have the external_openstack_cacert on the remote host but not on the ansible control host will be in trouble, right ? /hold (until we clarify this) Could we instead not change that, but define a new variable external_openstack_cacert_content (or a similar name) which would override the result of slurp ? This would also keep the secret mount instead of the hostPath, which is not great (external cloud controller could conceivably run on different hosts than the control plane). Thanks !

[Nathanael-Mtd]

Hmm yeah it seems to be a breaking change.
Overall there are something weird in how it works before that PR, because if I'm not wrong the var external_openstack_cloud_config_secret (from External OpenStack Cloud Controller | Get base64 cloud-config step) is made by using values from ansible host, and Get base64 cacert from remote host, no ?

That's what I found out during my deployment