)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":4264,"name":"Matthias Runge","email":"mrunge@redhat.com","username":"mrunge"},"change_message_id":"e93f8dfc388d48bbfe8da40c9c4172bc832afb1b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"e6da3536_cb8bdd7f","updated":"2026-09-25 07:30:31.000000000","message":"Thank you!","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"},{"author":{"_account_id":34975,"name":"Jaromír Wysoglad","email":"jwysogla@redhat.com","username":"jwysogla"},"change_message_id":"dcfad87f2508feca7410fb97b4164512941ff3bd","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"53d05f46_2ec379cd","updated":"2026-09-24 06:49:59.000000000","message":"recheck","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"},{"author":{"_account_id":34975,"name":"Jaromír Wysoglad","email":"jwysogla@redhat.com","username":"jwysogla"},"change_message_id":"9cdfda8e78c55def1824a4783ec946122b2845c3","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"3bd31632_7ddb0edf","updated":"2026-09-23 09:37:21.000000000","message":"recheck `Unable to locate package ksmtuned` - seems like another issue caused by a failed apt-get update","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"},{"author":{"_account_id":34975,"name":"Jaromír Wysoglad","email":"jwysogla@redhat.com","username":"jwysogla"},"change_message_id":"b1d3af69962f2564f43b06238651ce9a259eebfb","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"c3c5696c_10ed0e81","updated":"2026-09-23 08:27:02.000000000","message":"recheck apt-get update issue","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"},{"author":{"_account_id":34975,"name":"Jaromír Wysoglad","email":"jwysogla@redhat.com","username":"jwysogla"},"change_message_id":"0d32f6dae4f0d9f2c30627648171d6d08dee18c2","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"622961f1_7193a122","updated":"2026-09-23 12:02:44.000000000","message":"there seems to be some more significant infra issues. I\u0027ll try again tomorrow","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"}],"telemetry_tempest_plugin/scenario/telemetry_integration_prometheus_gabbits/ceilometer-sg-core-integration.yaml":[{"author":{"_account_id":9816,"name":"Takashi Kajinami","email":"kajinamit@oss.nttdata.com","username":"kajinamit"},"change_message_id":"15628724561f829476a290ce092306ab6b523b78","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"ssl_client_cert: $ENVIRON[\u0027SG_CORE_CLIENT_CERT\u0027]"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"ssl_client_key: $ENVIRON[\u0027SG_CORE_CLIENT_KEY\u0027]"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"tests:"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"  - name: Check for ceilometer metrics"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":1,"id":"dc2dec17_3297f441","line":1,"range":{"start_line":1,"start_character":0,"end_line":1,"end_character":15},"updated":"2026-09-25 08:34:18.000000000","message":"Note that this method may not allow us to implement a test case which requires access to not only sg-core but also other APIs such as aodh api. I wonder if we could find a way to implement the same in test case layer.","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"},{"author":{"_account_id":34975,"name":"Jaromír Wysoglad","email":"jwysogla@redhat.com","username":"jwysogla"},"change_message_id":"45c500d8a6ba2e41089958a269b56e7e1ded04f1","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"ssl_client_cert: $ENVIRON[\u0027SG_CORE_CLIENT_CERT\u0027]"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"ssl_client_key: $ENVIRON[\u0027SG_CORE_CLIENT_KEY\u0027]"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"tests:"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"  - name: Check for ceilometer metrics"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":1,"id":"f8406936_06743c35","line":1,"range":{"start_line":1,"start_character":0,"end_line":1,"end_character":15},"in_reply_to":"9dbe5f8f_e0008045","updated":"2026-09-25 10:14:00.000000000","message":"Like this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/telemetry-tempest-plugin/+/1007451 and then we add the ssl_client_key into any yaml file where we want to have mTLS.","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"},{"author":{"_account_id":34975,"name":"Jaromír Wysoglad","email":"jwysogla@redhat.com","username":"jwysogla"},"change_message_id":"0a88f890a61d24addcc7a432d7e0077cf78f0a38","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"ssl_client_cert: $ENVIRON[\u0027SG_CORE_CLIENT_CERT\u0027]"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"ssl_client_key: $ENVIRON[\u0027SG_CORE_CLIENT_KEY\u0027]"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"tests:"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"  - name: Check for ceilometer metrics"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":1,"id":"9dbe5f8f_e0008045","line":1,"range":{"start_line":1,"start_character":0,"end_line":1,"end_character":15},"in_reply_to":"dc2dec17_3297f441","updated":"2026-09-25 10:07:32.000000000","message":"you mean in case multiple services require client cert/key in a single testcase? With the current implementation the same cert/key would be sent with all requests in the ceilometer-sg-core-integration.yaml file (even though in this case there is only one). What if I generalized the config and removed the \"sg_core\" part from the option names? We\u0027d get a general client_cert, client_key config options, which could be used everywhere. This should work if all services accept the same cert/key. Or do you envision we should have a way to configure a different cert/key per service (which is essentially what this is doing, I know).","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"},{"author":{"_account_id":34975,"name":"Jaromír Wysoglad","email":"jwysogla@redhat.com","username":"jwysogla"},"change_message_id":"019aedf40a8055f8fd113be5c00ed649625251dc","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"ssl_client_cert: $ENVIRON[\u0027SG_CORE_CLIENT_CERT\u0027]"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"ssl_client_key: $ENVIRON[\u0027SG_CORE_CLIENT_KEY\u0027]"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"tests:"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"  - name: Check for ceilometer metrics"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":1,"id":"8e447660_306d1fab","line":1,"range":{"start_line":1,"start_character":0,"end_line":1,"end_character":15},"in_reply_to":"f8406936_06743c35","updated":"2026-10-05 10:23:14.000000000","message":"Upon re-read of your comment, I think I understand what you meant.\n\nFor example what if we added a testcase in this file that sends a request to Aodh?\n\nIn this case, the client cert would be sent to Aodh as well. If Aodh doesn\u0027t require a client cert, then it\u0027ll just ignore it (based on my testing, I\u0027ve worked with other services and mTLS in the past few months and I don\u0027t remember anything ever failing if it received a client cert it doesn\u0027t exepect) and tests will work. If Aodh requires a client cert, but it\u0027s verifying it against the same CA, then the tests will work as well although the config is a little confusing here with \"sg_core_client_key\" also being sent to Aodh. If Aodh requires a client cert, but it checks it against a different CA, then we have a problem, which the current solution can\u0027t solve.\n\nI opted for adding the ssl_client_cert and ssl_client_key on top of the file (for the whole test suite), because as far as I\u0027m aware gabbi doesn\u0027t support client certificates (there is actually an issue for adding the support https://github.com/cdent/gabbi/issues/315). Gabbi also checks all the keys inside each testcase and it\u0027ll error if an unknown key is present. So adding our own keys outside of the testcases on the test suite level is the only option I see for now.\n\nThe ultimate solution I see is implementing client cert support into gabbi. I may try implementing it myself, but it\u0027s kinda outside of my current priorities, so it wouldn\u0027t be anytime soon.","commit_id":"0037426bafafd4b6cf0926f17ae601620643b887"}]}