[09:34] <Dom_> hi everyone
[09:34] <Dom_> I am a beginner in maas, and i'm trying to learn and understand the environment
[09:35] <Dom_> In the production environment, we have region controller, rack controller, postgresql
[09:35] <Dom_> can all of these exist in 1 server?
[09:36] <Dom_> and when deploying our first MAAS server, do we need to have 3 physical servers, or shall we use something similar to vm, and create 3 vm servers with these?
[09:36] <Dom_> 1 server ==> i mean physical server
[09:37] <Dom_> The reason I have the confusion, when we say bare metal, then that means that this is main os that should be installed, and not to run it in a vm, is that correct?
[09:39] <Dom_> Also, another question, MAAS does not create VMs
[09:46] <Dom_> anyone online?
[09:49] <Dom_> Guys?
[09:58] <Dom_> is there anyone experienced in maas online?
[10:40] <Dom_> do anyone at least know if I could install maas, juju on a single very large (spec) physical machine for production use?
[11:17] <mup> Bug #1733592 opened: Wrong MTU values for container's NICs <cdo-qa> <cpe-onsite> <foundations-engine> <juju:Triaged by wpk> <MAAS:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733592>
[11:26] <kiko> Dom_, yes, I do exactly that.
[11:27] <kiko> Dom_, in fact, our foundation architecture does that across 3 machines
[11:27] <kiko> Dom_, (it's early for the USA and also it's Thanksgiving week so bear with the delayed responses)
[11:27] <Dom_> Hi Kiko, thanks!!
[11:27] <Dom_> no, it's alright
[11:27] <kiko> you can use a single physical server for MAAS region and rack
[11:28] <kiko> for Juju, you can bootstrap into a VM on MAAS by using tags or specific placement
[11:28] <kiko> into a VM [on the MAAS node] I meant
[11:28] <kiko> MAAS does create VMs using it's new Pods feature
[11:29] <kiko> Dom_, https://insights.ubuntu.com/2017/10/18/maas-kvm-pods/
[11:29] <Dom_> So I can understand, where does MAAS stand out from esxi for example?
[11:29] <kiko> MAAS itself isn't a hypervisor -- it's a provisioning tool
[11:29] <mup> Bug #1733592 changed: Wrong MTU values for container's NICs <cdo-qa> <cpe-onsite> <foundations-engine> <juju:Triaged by wpk> <MAAS:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733592>
[11:30] <Dom_> I've been into environments where we use esxi to split large physical machines into pieces
[11:30] <kiko> gotcha
[11:30] <kiko> so the KVM pods feature can do something similar
[11:30] <Dom_> Hmm
[11:30] <Dom_> We are trying to setup a cloud
[11:31] <Dom_> as a base, MAAS got our interest, so currently we have 1 large physical machine
[11:31] <Dom_> In the future, we are considering expanding the machines
[11:31] <Dom_> but is it correct that we deploy Ubuntu MAAS as primary OS?
[11:32] <kiko> correct, Ubuntu and then install MAAS
[11:32] <Dom_> And then from there, we advance through the pods feature which uses KVM
[11:32] <mup> Bug #1733592 opened: Wrong MTU values for container's NICs <cdo-qa> <cpe-onsite> <foundations-engine> <juju:Triaged by wpk> <MAAS:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733592>
[11:32] <Dom_> so MAAS technically replaces ESXi with better provisioning, am I correct?
[11:34] <Dom_> @Kiki, the reason I'm asking, we're not sure if we should install ESXi as a host, and then create 3 VMs for MAAS, or shall we just go directly for MAAS and let it handle what ESXi does?
[11:34] <Dom_> Kiko, the reason I'm asking, we're not sure if we should install ESXi as a host, and then create 3 VMs for MAAS, or shall we just go directly for MAAS and let it handle what ESXi does?
[11:38] <Dom_> Kiko, I'm asking from Virtualization perspective?
[11:38] <kiko> Dom_, I'm confused -- can you explain what you are trying to make happen?
[11:39] <Dom_> We want to host cloud services & applications, it might be also possible to host full vms, the company has dedicated a single large machine (from spec size) to use a test >> production, if successful, we may get more
[11:40] <Dom_> physical machines
[11:40] <Dom_> For us to setup this cloud correctly, we noted that MAAS takes care of the physical machine itself
[11:40] <Dom_> even though there is confusion about the capabilities
[11:41] <kiko> Dom_, you should get at least 3 machines to do a representative test
[11:41] <Dom_> In our environment, we would initially setup ESXi (kind of a very minimized bootable service) then create VM for Windows /or Ubuntu for example
[11:42] <Dom_> We are curious if we should really use MAAS directly instead of ESXi >> create VM for MAAS
[11:43] <Dom_> Kiko, the test here will be production like environment, then move forward to getting other machines
[11:43] <Dom_> Am I still confusing?
[11:44] <kiko> (I'm on the phone so hang in for my response)
[11:44] <Dom_> that's ok, tyt
[11:44] <Dom_> sorry...
[12:35] <Dom_> -.-
[14:00] <Dom_> kiko
[14:00] <kiko> I have long phone calls :)
[14:02] <vogelc> roaksoax: is there a way to increase the verbosity of the maas logs?
[14:11] <Dom_> i'm glad that the batteries lasted that long
[14:21] <roaksoax> vogelc: rackd.log, maas.log is as verbose as it could be. regiond.log can be more verbose for http requests
[14:21] <roaksoax> e.g. from the API
[14:21] <vogelc> ok
[14:22] <vogelc> roaksoax: have you explored using iPXE instead of pxe?
[14:38] <mup> Bug #1732980 changed: MAAS incorrectly PXE boot UEFI/legacy boot <hp-proliant-dl380-g9> <maas> <pxe-boot> <uefi> <MAAS:Invalid> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1732980>
[15:50] <mup> Bug #1733900 opened: [2.3final, UI] Machines that have failed testing don't have an error icon <2.3qa> <ui> <MAAS:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733900>
[16:41] <roaksoax> vogelc: yes, not a priority atm although we have some implementation proposed there for VM's so far
[16:42] <roaksoax> vogelc: also, ipxe breaks RFC's
[17:46] <heyya> is it possible to use Powerdns with maas?
[17:49] <roaksoax> heyya: in what way ? instead of bind ? nope
[18:09] <mup> Bug #1733923 opened: [2.3, HWTv2] badblocks test has 17 badblocks, but test shows as passed. <MAAS:Triaged by ltrager> <MAAS 2.3:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733923>
[20:03] <mup> Bug #1087183 changed: MaaS cloud-init configuration specifies 'manage_etc_hosts: localhost' <amd64> <apport-bug> <cloud-installer> <landscape> <quantal> <MAAS:Fix Released by rvb> <pyjuju:Won't Fix> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1087183>
[21:00] <mup> Bug #1733592 changed: Wrong MTU values for container's NICs <cdo-qa> <cpe-onsite> <foundations-engine> <internal> <juju:Invalid by wpk> <MAAS:Invalid> <MAAS 2.3:Invalid> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733592>
[21:00] <mup> Bug #1733945 opened: MAAS should warn loudly when it detects mismatched MTU settings <cdo-qa> <MAAS:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733945>
[21:09] <mup> Bug #1733947 opened: MAAS should allow status transistion from FAILED_DEPLOYMENT to DEPLOYING or COMMISSIONING <MAAS:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733947>
[21:18] <mup> Bug #1733947 changed: MAAS should allow status transistion from FAILED_DEPLOYMENT to DEPLOYING or COMMISSIONING <MAAS:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733947>
[21:25] <heyya> roaksoax: I'm running MAAS in vmware.  is it possible to use juju charms to deploy windows 10?
[21:30] <mup> Bug #1733947 opened: MAAS should allow status transistion from FAILED_DEPLOYMENT to DEPLOYING or COMMISSIONING <MAAS:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733947>
[21:45] <mup> Bug #1395904 changed: Need access to curtin install logs from past deployment <oil> <MAAS:Fix Released> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1395904>
[21:57] <mup> Bug #1395904 opened: Need access to curtin install logs from past deployment <oil> <MAAS:Fix Released> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1395904>
[22:03] <mup> Bug #1395904 changed: Need access to curtin install logs from past deployment <oil> <MAAS:Fix Released> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1395904>
[22:15] <mup> Bug #1733947 changed: MAAS should allow status transistion from FAILED_DEPLOYMENT to DEPLOYING or COMMISSIONING <MAAS:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1733947>
[22:23] <trdillon1> Hello. I get lshw script failed with status: 139 during every commission
[22:23] <trdillon1> So they all fail
[22:23] <trdillon1> Any ideas what causes this?